Fired Commissioners Allege Feldman Is Blocking Them from Their Work

CPSC Acting Chairman Peter Feldman is among the defendants in a May 21 civil complaint over the firings of the three Democratic commissioners. Allegations against him include that he is blocking the trio from exercising their duties and from their pay. Requests for relief include two involving Feldman:

48 Mondays a Year   A subscription to PRODUCT SAFETY LETTER is like adding a person to your staff to dig up must-know developments like this for less than $25 a week, and you learn of hundreds every year.   Subscribe Today   ----------   Other Recent Free Stories   Same Questions in DOGE Restraining Order Affect CPSC Situation   Democratic Commissioners Fired – Legal Fight Likely   Multiple Sources Say DOGE Process Has Begun at CPSC   'Pre-Decisional' OMB 'Passback' Describes HHS Absorbing CPSC   Two White House Directives Cover Regulatory Reviews   Executive Order on Feds' Data Sharing Raises 6(b) Questions   Does 'Public Safety' in Executive Orders Include Product Safety?   CPSC Uses Blanket Disclaimer to Comply with No-Gender Order   NEISS Reverts to Three Sex Codes after No-Gender Order   CPSC Can Continue Language Services Under English Order

• "Enjoin Defendant Feldman from obstructing Plaintiffs in any way from carrying out their duties as CPSC Commissioners, including by terminating their staff and barring their access to agency resources."

 

• "Enjoin Defendants [Scott] Bessent, [Russell] Vought, and Feldman from depriving Plaintiffs of the pay and benefits that Plaintiffs are entitled to receive as CPSC Commissioners, and order Defendants Bessent, Vought, and Feldman to restore all pay and benefits that have been unlawfully withheld from Plaintiffs and their staff."

Bessent is Secretary of the Treasury. Vought is director of the Office of Management and Budget. The other three requests are to declare the firings illegal, award the trio attorneys' fees, and a blanket "any other relief…appropriate."

Allegations against Feldman include:

"Plaintiff [Alexander] Hoehn-Saric made multiple attempts to call Defendant Peter A. Feldman, Acting Chairman of the CSPC. After Plaintiff Hoehn-Saric had waited in the lobby for approximately an hour, Defendant Feldman called and informed Plaintiff Hoehn-Saric that the President had terminated Plaintiff Hoehn-Saric from his role as CPSC Commissioner and that Plaintiff Hoehn-Saric should leave. Defendant Feldman did not identify any neglect of duty or malfeasance in office as justification for the purported termination."

Hoehn-Saric has said numerous times that he did not received a dismissal email like those received by Mary Boyle and Richard Trumka. Thus, he went to the agency the morning of the May 8 firings (PSL, 5/12/25).

The complaint – filed in Maryland US district court (8:25-cv-01628-MJM) – also alleges about Feldman:

"To effectuate Plaintiffs’ purported terminations, Defendant Feldman has prevented Plaintiffs from executing their duties as Commissioners, including by barring their access to their offices and agency email accounts, and by terminating personnel who staff Plaintiffs’ offices."

PSL is awaiting a response from CPSC and/or Feldman and will report on such comments if received.

"Neglect of duty or malfeasance" is a reference to the only reasons allowed in the CPSA for commissioners to be fired before the ends of their terms. The counter to that is such barriers encroach on a president's Article II constitutional powers. On that question, the complaint asserted:

"Article I of the U.S. Constitution vests '[a]ll legislative Powers' in Congress…Members of the executive branch have no constitutional authority to amend or override statutes that have been lawfully enacted, and Article II of the U.S. Constitution requires the President to 'take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.'"

Public Citizen Litigation Group filed the complaint on behalf of the trio. The complaint is at bit.ly/3ZrE0T6. The judge is Matthew Maddox.

The complaint does not reference Humphrey's Executor v. United States, the 1935 Supreme Court ruling that upheld similar protections against firing commissioners at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). That precedent is a now-regular target of those opposing such anti-dismissal provisions.

A month ago (PSL, 4/14/25), Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts stayed a lower court's reinstatement of two officials afforded similar protections. That signaled possible upcoming review of the Humphrey's precedent. The officials were at the Merit System Protection Board and National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

In February (PSL, 2/17/25), the Solicitor General wrote to legislators that the Department of Justice would not defend Humphrey's. The letter mentioned CPSC by name along with NLRB and FTC. Recipients were at least Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking members of the Senate and House judiciary committees.