Trump asks SCOTUS to let him remove Lisa Cook from Fed Reserve

The government insists Cook isn't entitled to due process as an appointee.

President Donald Trump has filed an emergency appeal with the United State Supreme Court seeking to stay a lower court order temporarily blocking the removal of Lisa Cook as governor on the Federal Reserve Board.

Solicitor General John Sauer argues on behalf of the administration that lower courts have no authority to second-guess the president's judgment on what constitutes "cause" for her removal, as allowed under federal law.

The government insists the allegations that Cook engaged in mortgage fraud -- prior to her appointment and confirmation to the Fed -- constitute sufficient grounds for the president's decision, and that Cook is not entitled to any due process as a presidential appointee.

"Put simply, the President may reasonably determine that interest rates paid by the American people should not be set by a Governor who appears to have lied about facts material to the interest rates she secured for herself—and refuses to explain the apparent misrepresentations," Sauer wrote.

Trump said earlier this month that he was firing Cook, a member of the seven-person Federal Reserve board of governors that helps shape the nation's monetary policy, over allegations raised by Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte that she committed mortgage fraud by improperly designating both her homes in Georgia and Michigan as her primary residence.

Cook, through an attorney, has denied any wrongdoing. She has not publicly explained apparent discrepancies on publicly available mortgage documents that list two personal homes as primary residences.

Cook -- who has not been charged with any crime -- has said that she would continue to serve in her role as a Fed governor, and filed a suit against Trump over his move to fire her.

The administration cites other recent Supreme Court decisions upholding -- on an interim basis -- the president's firing of members of independent agencies during the pendency of litigation on the merits, which could take up to two years.

The Supreme Court is likely to seek a response from Cook before making a decision on whether to intervene in the case.