Federal Reserve Board Director Lisa Cook speaks on “Economic and Monetary Policy Outlook” at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC, on November 3, 2025.
Kevin Lamarque | Reuters
President Donald Trump announced the unusual legal action Friday. It has created a committee to help decide whether to fire Federal Reserve President Lisa Cook.
President Trump accused Cook of mortgage fraud and ordered his firing in 2025. The Supreme Court blocked that attempt on procedural grounds, but said it could try again. President Trump told Cook in August that he was considering an attempt to replace her. Later that month, her lawyer denied the fraud charges and said President Trump had no reason to fire her.
Mr. Trump’s decision to create what he calls a “committee of inquiry” raises many questions about the path forward for Mr. Trump and Mr. Cook.
How does the committee work?
According to the president’s memo, Cook is scheduled to attend a hearing at the White House on November 5th and may be accompanied by a lawyer. The committee will weigh the evidence against her response. She has until November 10th for post-procedure follow-up.
The committee will then make a recommendation to the president on whether there is cause to remove her from the Fed. The final decision rests with the president. There is no time limit for the final decision.
Who are the members of the committee?
Mr. Trump appointed three people to hear evidence against Mr. Cook. Kevin Hassett, Director of the National Economic Council; Keith Sonderling, Acting Director, Office of Government Ethics and Labor; Andrea R. Lucas, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Chair; All three were appointed by Trump.
Has the president ever used a committee like this?
Yes, at least once. The Supreme Court’s majority opinion in Trump v. Cook, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, cited precedent.
President William Howard Taft convened a similar “committee” in 1912 to consider removing two members of the General Committee of Appraisals, the predecessor of today’s U.S. Court of International Trade. The committee ultimately recommended their removal. Roberts said the commission is a classic example of his view that Taft is our nation’s most judicial president, just as he was our nation’s most presidential chief justice. ”
But notably, the Supreme Court has not asked Trump or any other president to follow its example. The court said Mr. Cook had a right to be informed of the president’s decision, explanation of the evidence, and opportunity for defense. That process could be entirely in writing, Roberts noted.
Roberts wrote that Fed directors “have no right to an audience with the president or a full judicial trial.”
Will Mr. Cook cooperate with the committee hearing?
Her attorneys, Abby Rowell and Norm Eisen, said in a statement that she “welcomes the opportunity to present the facts to help clear her name and prove that there is no legal basis for her termination.” Still, they said, “We have serious doubts as to whether this ‘public hearing’ is lawful and legal.” They have repeatedly said Mr. Cook did not commit mortgage fraud.
Will the committee be independent from the chairman?
No, the commission is made up of executive branch appointees who report directly to the president. They are tasked with weighing the evidence and are expected to hear Mr Cook’s views. But they are not impartial members of the judiciary.
Should the Commission find that Mr. Cook committed a crime?
No, it is enough for the president to show that he has cause to fire her. The Supreme Court has not ruled in detail on what constitutes a qualifier, and if President Trump ultimately decides to remove her from office, the issue will almost certainly be the subject of future litigation.
Roberts wrote in Trump v. Cook that the determination of cause depends, at least in part, on the “seriousness of the alleged misconduct and the extent to which it relates to the governor’s duties.”
Could Ms. Cooke’s testimony put her in criminal danger?
Potentially. The order requires Cook to appear in court and allows Justice Department officials to question her, but does not say whether her answers will be protected from later use in the criminal case.
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution generally protects public officials from having their statements coerced under threat of losing their job used against them in criminal prosecution. However, it is not yet clear whether Cook’s testimony in this case will be legally enforceable.
Therefore, her attorney can seek assurances about how her testimony will be used before she answers questions that could potentially subject her to criminal charges. Invoking the Fifth Amendment or requesting immunity is not legally an admission of guilt, but President Trump may seek to portray it politically as such.
Will the committee make a final decision on Mr. Cook’s employment?
Almost certainly not. The committee will make a recommendation to Trump, but his decision may not be final either. The Supreme Court’s decision recognizes the president’s right to reconsider the cause finding. If President Trump moves forward with firing Cook after the hearing, the decision would likely come before a judge again, a process that could take months.
Will interest rates change depending on the committee’s results?
Not right now, or maybe never.
Mr. Cook is expected to participate in the Fed’s interest rate vote scheduled for Oct. 28. The Fed remains in good standing after the Supreme Court blocked President Trump’s attempt to fire Cook.
President Trump has not yet moved to replace her, but the commission is tasked with making recommendations on the issue. He is likely to remain on the Fed’s board even after the committee proceedings conclude, pending a court challenge.
What does the creation of the committee mean for former Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and other Fed members?
President Trump’s decision to establish the committee has no direct impact on Chairman Powell’s position at the Fed. Powell’s term as Fed chair ended in May, but he can remain as a voting member of the Fed’s board until January 2028.
Previous Fed chairmen have stepped down as Fed leaders’ terms expire, but Mr. Powell said in March that he wanted to stay on to conclude a separate investigation into him “with transparency and finality.”
The investigation closed two weeks ago without criminal charges, and the Justice Department said it would not pursue the matter further. Mr. Powell has not spoken about Mr. Cook’s issue since the Supreme Court’s decision.
The White House criticized third-generation Federal Reserve Director Michael Barr for his involvement in the 2023 Silicon Valley bank failure as the Fed’s top banking supervisor, but stopped short of calling for his resignation.
