The White House fired Democratic FTC Commissioners Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, according to multiple media reports and public statements 18 March, leaving two Republicans and no minority party representation on the agency's five-commissioner bipartisan bench.
Bedoya and Slaughter issued separate public statements denouncing the firings while indicating they will mount legal challenges to remain in their posts. The FTC did not immediately reply to IAPP inquiries, but the agency's website now states that Bedoya and Slaughter are former commissioners.
FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson supported the removals in an official statement, noting they are within constitutional authority and deemed the moves "necessary to ensure democratic accountability for our government."
Slaughter indicated the effectiveness of the FTC and its impact on U.S. consumers stems from its independence and "because its commissioners serve across political parties and ideologies." She added an expulsion of the FTC minority opposition cannot change the majority's actions or agenda, "but it does change whether they will have accountability when they do it."
Bedoya's statement outlined the work he, Slaughter and former FTC Chair Lina Khan did to protect consumers, including enforcement of "tech companies who think they can track you and your kids every hour of every day so they can pocket their next billion (dollars)."
Originally nominated by Trump in 2018 to fill out a vacated term, Slaughter was in the midst of her second term as FTC commissioner after being renominated by then-President Joe Biden, which was set to conclude in 2031. Bedoya was in his first term, which was set to expire in 2029.
The situation
The composition of the FTC's commissioner panel is governed by congressional rules established in 1914. They stipulate Senate-confirmed presidential appointments serve seven-year terms with the possibility of reconfirmation. The president has the ability to remove a commissioner for "inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office."
The firings became a realistic possibility when the White House issued an executive order 18 Feb. asserting the president has direct supervision and authority over independent agencies like the FTC under Article II of the U.S. Constitution. The order stated the FTC was among the agencies that "have exercised enormous power over the American people without Presidential oversight."
"These agencies issue rules and regulations that cost billions of dollars and implicate some of the most controversial policy matters, and they do so without the review of the democratically elected President," the order stated.
Complicating the terminations is a 90-year-old Supreme Court ruling requiring cause for any removals at independent agencies. The case, also known as "Humphrey's Executor," was a direct challenge to an FTC removal the Supreme Court deemed improper based on congressional rules.
According to Axios, Deputy Director of Presidential Personnel Trent Morse raised Article II and Humphrey's Executor in Bedoya's termination email. Morse indicated the firing wouldn't follow existing case law because the FTC allegedly "exercised substantial executive power" during Bedoya and Slaughter's tenure. The email also stated Bedoya's "continued service on the FTC is inconsistent" with the White House's policies.
Privacy impacts
Wilson Sonsini Partner Maureen Ohlhausen, a former FTC commissioner and acting chair under the first Trump administration, told the IAPP the day-to-day FTC functions would not be impacted by minority firings. She indicated the remaining Republican commissioners still hold a quorum to carry out business.
"The Trump team has been clearly signaling an appetite to challenge Humphrey’s Executor so I was not shocked by the firings," Ohlhausen said. "I don’t think replacements are already in mind as the administration has very little incentive to fill those positions quickly as the Republican chairman is now in firm control."
The FTC's Republican majority is slated to grow if the Senate confirms Commissioner-nominee Mark Meador, who alluded to support for presidential authority over the FTC during 26 Feb. confirmation hearing.
Plans to change course on the FTC's former digital enforcement strategy were already in motion. Prior to his appointment as chair, Ferguson outlined how he would ensure the FTC would "stop abusing FTC enforcement authorities as a substitute for comprehensive federal privacy legislation," while aiming to "end the FTC's attempt to become an AI regulator" and "terminate all initiatives investigating so-called ... AI 'bias.'"
One notable concern is how the FTC's new posture will be viewed in the context of EU-U.S. data flows.
The agency has a webpage dedicated to outlining its role in the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework. The page explains agency authority to take action against DPF-certified organizations when there is alleged "failure to comply with the Principles may violate Section 5 of the FTC Act's prohibition on unfair and deceptive acts." It also states, "The FTC is committed to vigorous enforcement of the DPF Principles, and works with privacy authorities in the EU to protect consumer privacy on both sides of the Atlantic."
Independence of U.S. agencies and entities is key for the DPF to stand. The DPF's two-layered redress system created under a 2022 executive order by former U.S. President Joe Biden outlined the "independent and binding" nature of the mechanism. Prior removal of U.S. Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board Democrats brought initial questions on DPF independence and potential FTC firings will likely heighten concerns.
European Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection Michael McGrath was in the U.S. for a meeting with Ferguson recently. At the time, McGrath said the meeting was productive, and he expected "that there is a willingness on both sides of the Atlantic to continue with" the transfer agreement.
American Economic Liberties Project Senior Fellow Hannah Garden-Monheit was the director of the FTC Office of Policy Planning December 2023 to January 2025. She told the IAPP the FTC firings "jeopardizes data flows underpinning over $1 trillion in annual trade and investment" through the DPF. She added, "The EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework is expressly predicated on the US having an independent, bipartisan FTC to enforce privacy protections without fear or favor."
Reaction to the firings from the civil society and advocacy community has been strong.Center for Democracy and Technology President and CEO Alexandra Reeve Givens said,“The FTC is an independent agency for a reason: its independence allows it to enforce the laws and protect American consumers without favor. These political firings fly in the face of the Commission's bipartisan history and nearly 100 years of Supreme Court precedent. And it's consumers who will pay the price.”
Consumer Reports Director of Technology Policy Justin Brookman, a former FTC policy director, issued a statement indicating the agency might be viewed as "less thoughtful, less effective, and more subject to the whims of politicians and industry lobbyists."
"These two commissioners have forcefully advocated for stronger protections against predatory business practices, sought to mitigate abuses of consumers’ personal data, and fought to create a more fair, transparent, and competitive marketplace," he said.
U.S. Congress is also chiming in with opposition to the removals. Sens. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Ed Markey, D-Mass., Reps. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., and Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., each released statements condemning the White House's removals.
In support of the FTC overhaul, Abundance Institute Head of AI Policy Neil Chilson, who previously served as acting FTC chief technologist and attorney advisor to the FTC chair, indicated on the social platform X that the removals were warranted based on how "the Biden administration undermined this rationale by steering the FTC deep into explicitly political territory."
Joe Duball is the news editor for the IAPP.
