Cook’s lawyer, Justice Department’s trade strikes clash on high-risk conflict

A federal judge in Washington, D.C. recruits attorneys and Lisa Cook at the Justice Department Friday Donald Trump’s Historic attempt to fire her from the Fed.

Landmark cases are almost certain to be kicked Supreme Court Review – But despite the high-risk nature of the legal dispute, Friday’s hearing ended after more than two hours, without a clear solution.

Biden-appointed U.S. District Court Judge Jia Cobb refused to immediately approve the temporary restraining order sought by Lisa Cook’s attorneys, which would give her current role on the Fed’s board of directors.

Cook’s lawyers included a request for a temporary restraining order in a lawsuit filed in federal court Thursday, challenging Trump’s attempt to fire her on the Independent Commission for allegations of mortgage fraud.

Court of Appeals stops Trump from firing federal board members, boosting Supreme Court struggle

Instead, Judge Cobb ordered the parties to submit any additional summary in court by Tuesday, after she dismissed the lawyer’s long weekend.

Cobb pointed out the novelty of the case before her, which involved the first attempt by an incumbent president to expel the Fed governor “is the reason.”

The fraud charges were first investigated by Bill Pulte of the federal agency, which regulated Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. he Cook accused of claiming two main residences In two separate states in 2021, the goal is to obtain more favorable loan terms.

Trump then released a letter about the Truth Society earlier this week, saying he had determined “enough reasons” to fire the chef, which he said was “immediately effective” – prompting her lawyer to file an emergency lawsuit.

The key to Friday’s argument is the definition of a definition that must be from the board of directors, the Federal Reserve Act or the FRA, a law designed to prevent members from being protected from political whimsical by the commander-in-chief or member of Congress.

The arguments also center on Cook’s claims in the lawsuit that Trump’s attempt to fire himself was an illegal effort to evacuate him from the Fed during his tenure, and that he will install his own nominee before the end of January 2038.

Cook’s lawyers believe her firing is just an “excusation” for Trump to win a majority on the Fed Commission – a debate Cobb admits made her “discomfort”.

They also tried to punch holes in mortgage fraud charges, which they said were done on social media and “backfilling.”

Cobb said shortly before the recession that the case “apparently raised important issues about the Federal Reserve Committee.”

She also noted that she has not yet determined what is called “irreparable harm” – prompting her to set a submission deadline for Tuesday.

Trump says he is “always” ready for a legal battle as the ousted federal governor plans to litigate

President Donald Trump speaks with Fed Chairman Jerome Powell while visiting the Fed in Washington State on Thursday, July 24, 2025. (Daniel Torok/White House)

Cook’s lawyers argued Friday that Trump’s attempt to fire her violated the Fifth Amendment’s due process rights, as well as her statutory rights to notice and a hearing on the Fed Act.

Her lawyer, Abbe Lowell, repeatedly noted that the administration had no “investigation or charges” before Trump suddenly announced that he would fire the chef.

Lowell also fiercely filed Justice Department charges that Cook had the opportunity to respond to allegations of mortgage fraud filed by Bill Pulte, noting that they were filed 30 minutes before Trump called for the cancellation of Cook.

He told Cobb that this is the latest attempt by the Trump administration to “put a lawsuit through tweets.”

Look at the evolving battle between Trump and Powell on Fed policy

Abbe Lowell can be seen in this 2024 photo to arrive at the J. Caleb Boggs Federal Building in Wilmington, Delaware. Hunter Biden’s former lawyer Lowell now represents Lisa Cook’s court case in a bid to fire her role from the Fed’s board. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Lawyers for the Trump administration argue that the president has broad freedom to determine the “cause” provision.

Yakoov Roth, a lawyer at the Ministry of Justice Tell Cobb Whether others see it as an “excusation” or not, the determination to invoke the provision should be left to the President.

“In my opinion, it’s like a microcosm of discretion, that’s the president’s power [its] apex,” Ross said.

The Justice Department lawyer also noted that Cook has so far raised any objections to the allegations and argued that she had “nothing” about the allegations that would result in her not being fired.

“What if the reason for the statement is obviously wrong?” Cobb asked, continuing to citing hypothesized concerns that, in theory, the president could use the allegations to stack the federal board with the majority.

As for the issue of “irreparable harm”, the Justice Department lawyers believe that it would be more harmful to continue Cook’s position, believing that “there is the harm of someone wrongly there… more than someone wrongly removed from office.”

Trump asks Scotus to insist on freezing billions of USDA payments

E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Court saw in Washington, DC. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Cook’s lawyers said Friday that the court itself does not have to define the meaning of “cause” for the Fed Act when reviewing the lawsuit.

Instead, Lowell suggested that the court should work backwards to determine that the allegations filed by Pulte were actually “backfilled” by Trump to form the basis for his removal.

Click here to get the Fox News app

“It’s hard to come up with an 11-page definition,” Lowell said Friday on the definition of “cause”. He added that it’s much easier to come up with a definition of one-page “not what”.

“Whatever it is, it’s not this,” Lowell said.