Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the controversy surrounding Kevin Hassett's defense of the Federal Reserve's independence while simultaneously supporting President Trump's criticisms of it, highlighting the complexities within the Trump administration regarding this sensitive topic [1]. Group 1: Criticism of the Federal Reserve - Hassett's first accusation is that the Federal Reserve's inflation predictions in 2021 demonstrate partisan bias, claiming that the Fed allowed inflation to spiral out of control under the Biden administration [2]. - Timiraos points out that during Biden's presidency, five out of six Federal Reserve governors were appointed during Trump's first term, including current Chair Jerome Powell, indicating a lack of partisan influence from the Biden administration [2]. Group 2: Monetary Policy Adjustments - Timiraos notes that the Federal Reserve began significantly raising interest rates once it recognized that its monetary policy was off track, with Biden-appointed governors filling positions starting in the second quarter of 2022 [3]. - The first rate hike of 75 basis points occurred in June 2022, with subsequent hikes also supported by the newly appointed governors [3]. Group 3: Timing of Policy Tightening - Hassett's second claim is that the Federal Reserve only began tightening monetary policy after Biden nominated Powell for a second term, which was announced on November 22, 2021 [4]. - Timiraos counters that the Fed had already announced a tapering of bond purchases on November 3, 2021, indicating that the decision to tighten policy was not solely dependent on Biden's nomination [4]. Group 4: Election-Year Rate Cuts - Hassett's third accusation is that the Federal Reserve unexpectedly cut rates before the last election to aid Democratic candidate Kamala Harris [5]. - Timiraos highlights that Hassett did not express this view at the time and had previously defended the rate cut as a wise decision based on available data [5][6].

Core Viewpoint - Stephen Miran, a Federal Reserve governor, indicated that he may adjust his inflation outlook if housing costs unexpectedly rise, acknowledging that his stance differs from mainstream views and is not fixed [1] Group 1: Inflation and Housing Costs - Miran downplayed the risk of tariffs driving inflation, suggesting that stricter immigration policies and average rent trends could suppress housing inflation [1] - He stated that if certain events indicate that the expected channels are ineffective and rent surges significantly, he would need to revise his mild inflation forecast [1] Group 2: Interest Rate Decisions - Miran voted against the recent Federal Reserve decision to lower interest rates by 0.25 percentage points, advocating for a more substantial cut of 0.5 percentage points [1] - He called for a series of aggressive rate cuts to bring the benchmark policy rate to what he considers a neutral level, which neither stimulates nor suppresses economic activity [1] Group 3: Employment Market and Future Predictions - Amid signs of weakness in the job market, policymakers are increasingly acknowledging the need for further rate cuts, although some remain cautious due to ongoing uncertainties surrounding Trump's tariff policies and inflation still exceeding the Fed's 2% target [1] - According to the median forecast from last month's meeting, Federal Reserve officials expect two additional rate cuts of 0.25 percentage points each by the end of 2025 [1] Group 4: Federal Reserve Independence - Miran, who joined the Federal Reserve Board in September, faced scrutiny regarding his previous role in the White House and the potential political influence on Fed decisions [2] - He emphasized that since his confirmation, he has not communicated with Trump and has not been directed to take specific policy actions, asserting his role is to bring fresh, non-mainstream perspectives to the Fed [2] - When asked about broader reforms at the Fed, Miran stated that such matters should ultimately be addressed by Congress rather than himself [2]

Core Points - The U.S. Supreme Court issued a directive on October 1, allowing Federal Reserve Board member Lisa Cook to temporarily remain in her position [1] - Oral arguments for the case are scheduled for January 2026, meaning Cook can continue her role until the court hears the case [3] - Cook was dismissed by President Trump on August 25, 2023, over allegations of mortgage fraud, which she denies, claiming it was an attempt to undermine the Fed's independence [5] - Since taking office in January, Trump has urged the Fed to lower interest rates [7] - Lisa Cook was nominated by President Biden in 2022 and is the first African American woman to serve as a Fed governor [7]

Core Points - The U.S. Supreme Court has allowed Federal Reserve Board member Lisa Cook to temporarily remain in her position [1] - Oral arguments for the case are scheduled for January 2026, meaning Cook can continue her role until then [1] - Cook was dismissed by President Trump on August 25, citing alleged mortgage fraud, which she denies [1] - Cook claims the dismissal is an attempt by Trump to exert control over the Federal Reserve and undermine its independence [1] - Following a district court's stay on her dismissal, the government requested the Supreme Court to allow Trump's immediate action, but the Supreme Court's directive has temporarily upheld Cook's position [1]

Core Points - The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily upheld the position of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, preventing her dismissal by President Trump until oral arguments are heard in January 2026 [1] - This ruling is seen as a protective measure for the Federal Reserve's independence, contrasting with previous instances where Trump was allowed to dismiss officials from other agencies [1] - Cook's dismissal was based on allegations of mortgage fraud, which has been labeled as unprecedented and controversial [1][2] Group 1 - The Supreme Court's decision allows Cook to remain in her role, reinforcing the Federal Reserve's autonomy [1] - Trump's administration has expressed dissatisfaction with the Federal Reserve's interest rate policies, prompting his attempts to remove Cook [1][2] - Cook's potential dismissal raises concerns about the independence of the Federal Reserve, with implications for market stability and economic foundations [2] Group 2 - Since August, the U.S. dollar index has declined by over 2%, while gold prices have increased by more than 17% during the same period, indicating market reactions to the ongoing uncertainty regarding the Federal Reserve's independence [3]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked President Trump's attempt to dismiss Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, allowing her to remain in office until oral arguments are heard in January 2026, which underscores the court's willingness to impose limits on presidential power [2][3][4]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The Supreme Court's ruling means that Lisa Cook can continue her role until the case is debated in January 2026 [2]. - Trump's administration had previously attempted to dismiss Cook, citing alleged misconduct, which has been described as "unprecedented" and sparked significant controversy [3][4]. - The U.S. government requested the Supreme Court to allow Trump's dismissal of Cook, arguing that lower court rulings disrespected Supreme Court precedents [4]. Group 2: Implications for Federal Reserve Independence - Cook has argued that her dismissal would severely undermine the independence of the Federal Reserve, making it subservient to presidential will [5]. - Concerns about the independence of the Federal Reserve have begun to affect market perceptions, with the Governor of the Bank of Canada noting that such worries have diminished the dollar's appeal as a safe-haven asset [7]. - If Cook were to be dismissed, it could allow Trump to reshape the Federal Reserve's board, as he has already appointed two of the current seven governors during his first term [6]. Group 3: Market Reactions - Since August, the U.S. dollar index has fallen by over 2%, while gold prices have surged by more than 17% during the same period, indicating market reactions to the uncertainty surrounding the Federal Reserve's independence [8].

Core Viewpoint - The legal battle surrounding Lisa Cook, a Federal Reserve Board member, is not just about her career but the future of the Federal Reserve's independence and its ability to operate free from political interference [1][16]. Legal Context - The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled against former President Donald Trump's emergency request to block the White House from firing Cook, reinforcing the legal protections for Federal Reserve officials [1][7]. - The Federal Reserve Act requires "just cause" for the dismissal of a board member, typically involving serious misconduct during their tenure, which Trump's allegations did not meet [7][9]. Allegations and Defense - Trump's administration accused Cook of mortgage fraud related to her obtaining favorable loans before her appointment, but these claims were deemed insufficient to justify her dismissal [5][7]. - The court noted that Cook had not faced criminal charges and that the allegations were unrelated to her duties as a Federal Reserve member [7]. Political Implications - The attempt to remove Cook is seen as part of a broader strategy by the White House to reshape the Federal Reserve's leadership, aiming to replace dissenting voices with allies [8][16]. - Cook's appointment was politically contentious, and her removal would symbolize a significant shift in the Federal Reserve's independence, which Trump has criticized for its monetary policy decisions [8][11]. Court's Concerns - The court expressed concerns that allowing the president to dismiss Federal Reserve members at will could lead to market instability and undermine the credibility built over a century [9][11]. - The potential for repeated legal battles over the dismissal of board members could disrupt the Federal Reserve's decision-making process and policy continuity [9][11]. Future Outlook - Although Cook has temporarily retained her position and will participate in upcoming interest rate meetings, the legal struggle may continue, with expectations that Trump’s side could appeal to the Supreme Court [13]. - The case represents a critical test of the limits of political pressure on an independent economic governance institution, highlighting vulnerabilities within the system [16].

Market Overview - Despite initial declines due to the U.S. government shutdown, U.S. stock indices reversed course and closed higher, with the Dow Jones and S&P 500 showing gains [1] - U.S. Treasury yields fell across the board, with the 10-year yield dropping to 4.11% [2] - The healthcare sector saw gains driven by optimism from a Pfizer agreement with the White House, contributing to a narrowing of market losses [1] Economic Data and Employment - The government shutdown poses a risk of missing key economic data needed for Federal Reserve decisions, with potential delays in non-farm payroll reports [3][5] - The ADP report indicated an unexpected decline in U.S. employment for September, aligning with other data suggesting a slowdown in the labor market [4] - Manufacturing activity in the U.S. contracted for the seventh consecutive month in September, although the market reaction was muted [4] Investor Sentiment - Investors are concerned about the duration of the government shutdown and its impact on economic data, but historical precedents suggest limited macroeconomic effects from such events [5] - Some analysts believe that for the shutdown to significantly impact the stock market, it would need to last longer and result in substantial layoffs or adverse conditions in the bond market [5] Sector Performance - Semiconductor stocks experienced significant gains, with Micron Technology rising nearly 6% and TSMC reaching a new historical high [5] - Price increases announced by NAND Flash manufacturers, including SanDisk and Micron, have sparked bullish expectations for the storage industry, with Morgan Stanley predicting a price increase cycle that may last until 2026 [5] Federal Reserve Independence - The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked Trump's attempt to dismiss Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, marking a victory for the Fed's independence [7][8] - The next Federal Reserve meeting is scheduled for October 28-29, where decisions on potential interest rate cuts will be made [7]

美国最高法院拒绝允许特朗普立即罢免美联储理事库克，后者正通过诉讼争取保留职位，这对特朗普试 图加强对美联储控制权的努力构成打击。 周三发布的这项命令意味着，库克至少可以在其职位上留任到明年1月，届时法官们将在听取此案的辩 论后做出裁决。自8月下旬特朗普以她否认的抵押贷款欺诈指控为由罢免她以来，这位经济学家一直坚 持留任。 法院表示，在司法部就下级法院称她很可能赢得解雇诉讼的裁决提出上诉期间，它将推迟对特朗普罢免 库克的请求采取行动，没有法官对该命令表示异议。 "特朗普总统已依法因故将库克免职，"白宫发言人库什·德赛在一份声明中说。"我们期待在1月份向最 高法院呈递我们的口头辩论后，取得最终胜利。" 库克的首席律师、Lowell & Associates律所的Abbe Lowell和"民主捍卫者基金"执行主席Norm Eisen在一 份声明中说，"法院的决定正确地允许了库克理事继续在联邦储备委员会中履行其职责，我们期待与法 院命令相符的进一步程序。" 美联储拒绝对此发表评论。 美联储拥有独立于司法部的法律办公室，它在这场斗争中没有站队，并告诉法官它将尊重任何最终的裁 决。美联储定于10月28-29日举行下一次会 ...

Core Points - The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily upheld the position of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, scheduling oral arguments for January 2026, allowing her to remain in office until then [1] - This ruling is seen as a setback for President Trump, who aimed to remove Cook over allegations of mortgage fraud, which she denies, claiming the lawsuit is an attempt to undermine the Fed's independence [1] - The White House expressed confidence in eventually removing Cook, citing "just cause" for her dismissal [1] Group 1 - The Supreme Court's decision allows Cook to attend upcoming Federal Reserve meetings on October 28-29 and December 9-10, with the possibility of voting in January [2] - Tim Mahedy, a former senior advisor at the San Francisco Fed, commented that while the situation is not resolved, the ruling is a victory for the Fed's independence [2] - The Supreme Court is also set to hear a case regarding Trump's attempt to remove FTC Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, which may influence the outcome of Cook's case [2]