Administration’s Push to Oust Perlmutter Stalls as Supreme Court Hits Pause

In a brief but consequential order, the Supreme Court declined, for now, to remove Shira Perlmutter from her role as Register of Copyrights, allowing a lower court decision reinstating her to stand. The move delays the Biden administration’s ongoing effort to dismiss her until the justices hear two related cases addressing the limits of presidential removal power.

The Court issued no written opinion, but the message was clear: Perlmutter’s future hinges on the Court’s upcoming rulings in cases involving two other officials—Rebecca Slaughter of the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook. Both women were targeted for removal under the administration’s argument that certain independent-agency positions must be subject to presidential control to ensure constitutional accountability.

Justice Clarence Thomas noted, in a separate statement, that he would have granted the administration’s request immediately.

Why the Administration Wants Perlmutter Removed

Although Perlmutter is not a political figure in the traditional sense, her position sits at the center of a long-running constitutional and policy struggle: how much freedom officials in semi-independent agencies should have from presidential oversight.

According to legal filings and administration arguments, there are three major reasons the White House is seeking her removal:

1. The Administration Claims Perlmutter’s Role Must Be Directly Answerable to the President

The Register of Copyrights operates within the Library of Congress—an institution historically insulated from executive control. The administration argues that, because the Register makes decisions with significant economic and regulatory implications (including copyright policy, enforcement standards, and modernization directives), the president must have the power to dismiss that official at will.

The appeals court’s reinstatement of Perlmutter functionally limited that authority, prompting the administration to challenge her job protections as unconstitutional.

2. Her Case Directly Impacts Two Higher-Profile Battles Over Removal Power

Perlmutter’s situation parallels two politically charged cases already before the Supreme Court:

• Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic commissioner at the FTC

• Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors

In both matters, the administration argues that statutory removal protections improperly restrict presidential authority.

Keeping Perlmutter in place while the Court rules on Slaughter and Cook would create conflicting precedents and complicate the government’s broader strategy. The administration wants consistency across agencies: if officials can’t be removed in one context, it could undermine their position in the other two cases.

3. The Administration Has Policy Differences with Perlmutter’s Approach to Copyright Modernization

While not publicly framed as the primary reason, internal sources and filings indicate that the administration disagrees with aspects of Perlmutter’s management and policy direction—particularly her pace and structure of copyright modernization initiatives.

Her leadership at the Copyright Office involves rulemaking, licensing frameworks, and technological updates—all areas where the administration favors a more aggressive and centralized approach aligned with its broader digital-economy agenda.

Without clear removal authority, the administration would be forced to pursue slower, indirect methods of redirecting the office’s priorities.

What Happens Next

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Lisa Cook case on January 21, with the Slaughter case to follow. Only after ruling on those disputes will the justices determine whether Perlmutter can be removed at will or retains statutory protections that shield her position.

Until then, Perlmutter remains in her role, continuing to oversee national copyright policy as the country’s highest court prepares to define the limits of White House influence over federal agencies.