The U.S. Supreme Court is currently debating a case that could significantly weaken the longstanding precedent that limits presidential authority over federal agencies, in a move that aligns with President Donald Trump's broader efforts to reshape the federal government. Trump’s administration advocates for a radical interpretation of the unitary executive theory, asserting that the president should have near-absolute power to fire federal employees, including those in independent agencies, challenging nearly 150 years of civil service protections. The case involves Trump’s attempt to fire FTC member Rebecca Slaughter, which raises questions about the constitutionality of job protections established by the Humphrey’s Executor case in 1935. Legal experts suggest the Supreme Court's conservative majority may overrule or diminish Humphrey’s, further enabling the president’s power to dismiss federal officials at will. Trump has also proposed creating a new category of federal employees, “Schedule F,” to allow easier firing without traditional protections, signaling an ongoing effort to erode civil service independence. Critics warn that these actions threaten to undermine the professionalism and nonpartisan nature of the federal workforce, risking a shift toward patronage and spoils systems. Experts emphasize that such profound changes could lead to a more autocratic government, with limited recourse for reversal, and warn that the Supreme Court’s current stance may embolden further executive overreach unless explicitly checked.