Elections

USCA Case #25-5261 Document #2133109

Filed: 09/02/2025

Page 9 of 29

No. 25-5261

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

September Term, 2025

228 (“not revisit[ing] Humphrey’s Executor”), with id. at 286 (Kagan, J., concurring in the judgment with respect to severability and dissenting in part) (noting that the Federal Trade Commission, along with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, “can issue regulations, conduct its own adjudications, and bring civil enforcement actions in court all backed by the threat of penalties”); compare Collins, 594 U.S. 220, 250-251 (2021) (recognizing that Seila Law did “not revisit () prior decisions”) (quoting Seila Law, 591 U.S. at 204), with id. at 285 (Sotomayor, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (noting that the Federal Housing Finance Agency may initiate administrative proceedings, issue subpoenas, and impose monetary penalties); see generally Free Enter. Fund, 561 U.S. at 483 (in case involving multimember board, declining to “reexamine” Humphrey’s Executor).

Those repeated decisions of the Supreme Court to preserve Humphrey’s Executor with full knowledge of the executive powers exercised by the Commission—the same ones relied on by the government here as purported grounds for discarding precedent-control this court’s decisionmaking. For when a precedent of the Supreme Court “has direct application in a case,” as Humphrey’s Executor does here, “the Court of Appeals should follow the case which directly controls, leaving to [the Supreme] Court the prerogative of overruling its own decisions.” Rodriguez de Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc., 490 U.S. 477, 484 (1989). A lower court is bound by that rule “even if the lower court thinks the precedent is in tension with ‘some other line of decisions”” or that “intervening decisions from [the Supreme] Court had ‘implicitly overruled’ [the precedent.]” Mallory v. Norfolk S. Ry. Co., 600 U.S. 122, 136 (2023) (quoting Rodriguez de Quijas, 490 U.S. at 484); see also Agostini v. Felton, 521 U.S. 203, 237 (1997) (“We do not acknowledge, and we do not hold, that other courts should conclude our more recent cases have, by implication, overruled an earlier precedent.”).

The Fifth Circuit has faithfully hewed to this rule with respect to the very precedent at issue here-Humphrey’s Executor. Illumina, Inc. v. Federal Trade Comm’n, 88 F.4th 1036, 1047 (5th Cir. 2023) (“[A]lthough the FTC’s powers may have changed since Humphrey’s Executor was decided, the question of whether the FTC’s authority has changed so fundamentally as to render Humphrey’s Executor no longer binding is for the Supreme Court, not us, to answer.”). This court likewise has repeatedly acknowledged that its role is to apply Supreme Court precedent, not to declare its overruling. See National Security Archive v. CIA, 104 F.4th 267, 272 n.1 (D.C. Cir. 2024) (“This Court is charged with following case law that directly controls a particular issue[.]”); Shea v. Kerry, 796 F.3d 42, 54 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (quoting Agostini, 521 U.S. at 237); Sierra Club v. EPA, 322 F.3d 718, 725 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (quoting

Page 9 More

Case: 25-1812 Document: 159

Page: 69

Filed: 08/29/2025

V.O.S. SELECTIONS, INC. v. TRUMP

9

related actions in two categories—one focused on money or its financial substitutes (subsection A) and the other on property (subsection B). War Powers Act of 1941, § 301, 55 Stat. at 839-40 (amending section 5(b) of TWEA). Under TWEA, the President may
(A) investigate, regulate, or prohibit, any transac- tions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit or pay- ments between, by, through, or to any banking institution, and the importing, exporting, hoard- ing, melting, or earmarking of gold or silver coin or bullion, currency or securities, and
(B) investigate, regulate, direct and compel, nul- lify, void, prevent or prohibit, any acquisition hold- ing, withholding, use, transfer, withdrawal, transportation, importation or exportation of, or dealing in, or exercising any right, power, or privi- lege with respect to, or transactions involving, any property in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest ….
TWEA § 5(b) [50 U.S.C.§ 4305(b)(1)]. That language has been part of TWEA ever since. See Regan v. Wald, 468 U.S. at 226 n.2, 227 n.7; 50 U.S.C.App. § 5(b) (1976 ed.); 50 U.S.C. § 4305(b)(1) (current version).
In 1976, Congress enacted the NEA. §§ 101, 201–202, 301, 401, 501-02, 90 Stat. at 1255-59, now codified as amended at 50 U.S.C. §§ 1601, 1621–22, 1631, 1641, 1651. The NEA, where applicable, generally terminated preexist- ing declarations of emergency, NEA § 101, 50 U.S.C. § 1601, and established new constraints on new declara- tions, NEA §§ 201–202, 301, 401, 50 U.S.C. §§ 1621–22, 1631, 1641. One provision governing national emergencies declared under the NEA requires automatic termination of the declared emergency after one year unless renewed by the President. NEA § 202(d), 50 U.S.C. § 1622(d). Another provision, as enacted, allowed both for presidential termi- nation by proclamation and for congressional termination More

Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Pulte’s Criminal Referral
39. The Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, William Pulte, was confirmed to his role in March 2025. The FHFA’s stated mission is to “ensure the regulated entities fulfill their mission by operating in a safe and sound manner to serve as a reliable source of liquidity and funding for the housing finance market throughout the economic cycle.”

15

40. Since his confirmation, Director Pulte, often through social media postings, has used his office to allege mortgage wrongdoing against public officials, now turning his sights on Governor Cook. Each of Director Pulte’s criminal referrals have notably been, at one time or another, political targets of President Trump’s ire prior to any mortgage fraud allegations.
41. Director Pulte has also parroted President Trump’s criticisms of the Federal Reserve. On June 18, 2025, Director Pulte posted on X that Chairman Powell “is hurting the housing market by being Too Late to lower rates. He needs to resign, effective immediately.”

“16

42. On July 16, 2025, Director Pulte reportedly gave President Trump a draft of a letter firing Chairman Powell. 17 That same day, Director Pulte posted on X that renovations to the building that houses the Federal Reserve are “riddled” with fraud, 18 and President Trump stated that Chairman Powell may be fired for fraud, noting that “I mean it’s possible there’s fraud involved with the $2.5 billion renovation.”

“19

16

18,

15 U.S. Federal Housing, FHFA At-A-Glance, www.fhfa.gov/about (last visited Aug. 27, 2025). Bill Pulte (@pulte), Χ (June 2025, 2:40 PM) https://x.com/pulte/status/1935407350556561775.
17 Maggie Haberman and Colby Smith, Trump Has Draft of Letter to Fire Fed Chair. He Asked Republicans if He Should Send It., N.Y. Times (July 16, 2025),

18

Bill

Pulte (@pulte),

X (July 16, 2025,

https://x.com/pulte/status/1945562005777293795.

19

3:11

PM),

Bloomberg Podcasts, Trump Says Firing Powell ‘Unlikely’ (Full Q&A), YouTube (July 16, 2025), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib-OCc31Wfs.

13 More