WASHINGTON — The Justice Department is urging a federal appeals court to overturn a ruling that found President Donald Trump unlawfully fired two National Credit Union Administration board members, arguing that Congress never explicitly restricted the president’s power to remove them.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has scheduled oral arguments for Nov. 17 in the administration’s appeal. The dispute centers on whether former NCUA Chairman Todd Harper and board member Tanya Otsuka, both Democrats, could be dismissed before their terms expired.
The board currently has one member, Republican John Crews.
In a brief filed Friday, the Justice Department argued that the president may remove NCUA board members at will because the law governing the agency contains no express restriction on removal. Harper and Otsuka contend that Congress protected board members from dismissal without cause when it created a three-member board with staggered, six-year terms.
Comparison is Rejected
The administration rejected the former members’ comparison of the NCUA to the Federal Reserve. Congress expressly restricted removal of Federal Reserve governors but did not do so for NCUA board members, the department argued. “In all events, the NCUA is not the Federal Reserve,” the brief said, according to Banking Dive.
History of Case
As the CU Daily was first to report, Trump fired Harper and Otsuka in April 2025. They sued, arguing that the dismissals violated the law and left the three-member NCUA board with only one member.
U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ruled in their favor in July 2025. He found that Congress had limited presidential removal authority when it replaced the agency’s single administrator with a board whose members serve staggered terms. The government had asserted no cause for either firing, Ali wrote. He ordered officials to recognize Harper and Otsuka as board members and provide the access needed for them to carry out their duties.
The administration appealed. In August 2025, the D.C. Circuit stayed Ali’s order pending appeal, leaving Harper and Otsuka off the board, and expedited the case. The court later removed arguments scheduled for November 2025 from its calendar while awaiting a Supreme Court decision in a separate presidential removal case.
Competing Views of Agency Independence
Harper and Otsuka have argued that the NCUA’s structure and financial regulatory role support protections similar to those afforded Federal Reserve governors. The Justice Department says the distinction is what Congress wrote into law: an explicit removal provision for the Federal Reserve, but none for the NCUA. It also argued that the Federal Reserve’s treatment does not establish removal protections for every federal financial regulator.
