CNN
—

On Saturday, a federal appeals court ruled that the leader of a government ethics watchdog, dismissed by President Donald Trump the previous week, can remain in his position. This ruling may set the stage for a significant legal battle regarding similar terminations that could reach the Supreme Court.

The appellate court upheld a temporary restraining order that allows Hampton Dellinger to continue as special counsel. Dellinger, whose appointment by President Joe Biden marked the beginning of a five-year term, was affected by this decision.

The Office of Special Counsel operates independently to manage accusations of whistleblower retaliation and is distinct from special counsels assigned to oversee sensitive investigations within the Justice Department. This agency was established by Congress to maintain its independence.

In a decision reached with a 2-1 majority, the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit noted that the temporary order in favor of Dellinger could not be contested. The court stated that examining such an order would be “inconsistent with governing legal standards” and deemed it “ill-advised.”

The court emphasized that allowing an appeal against a temporary restraining order would set a troublesome precedent. It warned that accepting claims of “extraordinary harm” could lead to a surge in appeals aimed at challenging such orders.

Circuit Judges J. Michelle Childs and Florence Pan, both appointed by Biden, voted against the Trump administration’s appeal for a stay. In contrast, US Circuit Judge Gregory Katsas, appointed by Trump, indicated he would have supported the government’s request.

Katsas remarked that the order’s extraordinary nature, which mandates the president to engage with an agency head he has previously dismissed, necessitates immediate review by an appellate court.

This ruling may initiate the first appeal among a series of legal disputes stemming from Trump’s second term, with the Department of Justice hinting at its intention to pursue an appeal.

The case raises deeper issues regarding Trump’s attempts to centralize authority within the executive branch by terminating government personnel serving on independent boards. Many of these individuals are safeguarded from arbitrary dismissal by legal provisions requiring a president to provide justifiable reasons for their removal.

Dellinger’s legal action is one of several initiated by officials dismissed by Trump, challenging the power of a president to unseat heads of independent agencies.

These lawsuits reference a 1935 Supreme Court case, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which affirmed Congress’s authority to implement for-cause protections for members of independent federal agency boards. However, some conservative justices have expressed concerns about this ruling in recent years, and during Trump’s tenure, the Department of Justice argued the protections might be unconstitutional.

This report includes contributions from CNN’s Tierney Sneed.