The removal of three Democratic commissioners from the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) prompted a lawsuit that reached the Supreme Court and an “intra-agency civil war” described in administration filings. Despite this extraordinary upheaval, Sidley Austin partners Sarah Carlson and Judith Shophet Sidkoff examine how the CPSC remains laser-focused on enforcement, announcing at least 376 recalls by mid-September and setting a new benchmark of 28 recalls in a single week while intensifying civil penalty enforcement with penalties exceeding $16 million.
Despite recent political upheaval within the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), its commitment to consumer safety remains steadfast. Even though proposed structural changes create uncertainty, companies should not relax compliance efforts.
The CPSC’s design has long reflected a bipartisan, independent structure: five commissioners, staggered seven-year terms, no more than three from the same party and removal only for cause. These guardrails were meant to protect the agency from political swings, though their durability is now being tested.
Bipartisanship may be waning, but the commission’s effectiveness is not.
A fired-up commission
From the first days of President Donald Trump’s second term, the White House has targeted government agencies through staffing cuts and deregulation techniques.
The Democratic commissioners initially resisted the administration’s agenda, including proposed staff reductions. Seemingly in response, Trump removed Mary Boyle, Alexander Hoehn-Saric and Richard Trumka on May 9, 2025. Commissioner Douglas Dziak resigned Aug. 22, 2025, leaving acting Chairman Peter Feldman as the sole remaining commissioner.
In the wake of their firings, the three Democratic commissioners filed suit in the District of Maryland, challenging their removal as unlawful. The Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) strictly limits the removal of Commissioners to cases of “neglect of duty or malfeasance in office.”
The District of Maryland eventually reinstated the commissioners, holding that their “for-cause removal” protection did not infringe upon the president’s authority. The Trump Administration promptly appealed, but the Fourth Circuit left the reinstatement order in place.
Undeterred, the Trump Administration sought emergency intervention from the US Supreme Court. The filing depicts an “intra-agency civil war,” with “hostile members who are deliberately thwarting the president’s objectives for the agency” — a far cry from the bipartisanship traditionally hailed as a commission hallmark. On July 23, 2025, the court sided with Trump, again removing the Democratic commissioners. The ruling marks another significant moment in the debate over executive authority and agency independence, appearing to sideline century-old “for cause” protections. The case is currently in abeyance pending Supreme Court review of a related action, but a return to the Supreme Court seems inevitable.
The battle also extended beyond the courts. On July 21, 2025, Feldman and Dziak announced the recall of 5 million above-ground pools, “the largest of its kind in agency history.” In a departure from prior agency communications, their statement explicitly reproached the leadership of Hoehn-Saric, the former commission chair, for “fail[ing] to act” despite knowing about the hazard, citing alleged “years of inaction” as “unacceptable.”
Against this backdrop, on Oct. 2, 2025, Trump nominated William “Billy” Hewes III — the Republican former mayor of Gulfport and longtime Mississippi state senator — to fill one of the commission vacancies, signaling an effort to install ideological allies in the commission.
The accusations levied in recent agency communications, coupled with the administration’s selection of a politically aligned nominee, may not bode well for bipartisan collaboration and bolster anticipated arguments by the Trump Administration that the commissioners were fired for cause.
What Does Weakened CFPB Mean for FinServ Compliance?
State-level enforcement, private rights of action & public perception all call for staying the course
Read moreDetailsPolitics aside, the work goes on
Despite extraordinary upheaval, the commission’s mission remains very much alive.
Indeed, the commission remains laser-focused on enforcing the statutes and regulations with which it is charged. The CPSC announced at least 376 recalls and safety warnings by mid-September 2025, putting it on track to break the all-time agency record. Even while functioning at reduced capacity during the fall 2025 government shutdown, the CPSC maintained critical safety operations and issued multiple recalls.
As if to silence doubts about its enforcement muscle, the commission set a new benchmark on May 15, 2025 of 28 recalls and warnings in a single week. Many concerned products manufactured in China, highlighting the administration’s focus on “cracking down on foreign violators.” Though acting Chairman Feldman has expressed his desire to work with Chinese companies in advancing consumer safety, the very real difficulty in contacting, or even identifying, these foreign sellers often hinders those efforts.
Reflecting its more aggressive posture, the commission has also increasingly wielded unilateral news releases against companies resisting voluntary recalls to alert the public of potential hazards. The commission issued more than a dozen unilateral news releases in the first half of 2025. Remarkably, in the three weeks after the Democratic commissioners’ dismissal, the commission issued almost double the number of product warnings and recalls than the three weeks preceding it.
The CPSC has also intensified civil penalty enforcement. In August 2025, an air conditioner importer agreed to more than $16 million in penalties and restitution; Feldman described the penalty as “a clear reminder” that the CPSC “remain[s] fully empowered and unwavering in [its] mission to protect American families.” Additionally, a fitness tracker manufacturer and an awning manufacturer agreed to pay $12.3 million and $9.3 million, respectively, for failure to promptly report serious burn hazards, delays allegedly stretching for years. Both companies were also required to adopt strict compliance measures.
The commission continues to raise the stakes for noncompliance. On June 16, 2025, two executives were criminally sentenced to over three years in prison for failure to report defective dehumidifiers and conspiracy to defraud, a first-of-its-kind conviction. The recalled dehumidifiers were implicated in four deaths, over 450 fires and millions in property damage. Prosecutors alleged the companies knew of the severe defects as early as 2012 but delayed disclosure, continuing to sell while falsifying reports to the commission about safety.
Feldman reiterated that the “sentences are a clear message that the CPSC will take a hard line against executives who break American laws and endanger families.” This underscores the commission’s commitment to enforcing companies’ affirmative reporting obligations.
Are structural changes ahead?
While enforcement is at full throttle, the CPSC’s foundation remains at risk of overhaul. On May 30, 2025 — before the temporary reinstatement of the Democratic commissioners — the commission submitted a 2026 performance budget request, which sought to move the commission under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and create a singular leadership position, the assistant secretary for consumer product safety, to supervise the work currently delegated to five commissioners.
According to Feldman, this restructuring request is not an effort to eliminate the commission but part of a plan to combine agencies under a united goal of public health. And, on its face, the budget request acknowledges that any contemplated restructuring is conditioned on congressional approval, which has yet to happen.
The enduring imperative: consumer protection above all
This brings us back to the commission’s central tenet: consumer protection. The CPSC’s mission, and businesses’ corresponding reporting and compliance obligations, remain grounded in federal law. Despite today’s uncertainties, the old adage holds: the more things change, the more they stay the same. While the commission appears increasingly politicized, this shift is largely one of optics rather than substance.
At a September 2025 Sidley Austin event, Feldman stressed that enforcement remains vigorous, highlighting expanded portside surveillance, increased e-commerce marketplace oversight and growing AI use to quickly identify hazardous products. His comments reinforce that, no matter its makeup, the commission’s appetite for enforcement has not waned. Amid today’s political and administrative flux, the CPSC’s steady regulatory posture stands out as a rare constant.
Sarah Carlson 
Judith Shophet Sidkoff
