Lisa D. Cook on Tuesday challenged President Trump’s latest attempt to remove her from her role as a Federal Reserve governor, questioning the objectivity of a White House investigation into unproven allegations that she committed mortgage fraud.
In a letter to the White House viewed by The New York Times, Ms. Cook’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said the governor would not be able to attend a hearing scheduled for Nov. 5 because she would be fulfilling her duties in Europe “at financial and monetary policy meetings.”
Mr. Lowell said the earliest that any hearing could take place was after the Fed’s policy meeting scheduled for Dec. 8-9.
Mr. Lowell also questioned the objectivity of the investigation, which will be run by a committee that is staffed with Mr. Trump’s political appointees, including Kevin Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council; Keith Sonderling, the Labor secretary who is serving as acting director of a government ethics office; and Andrea Lucas, the chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
“We have significant concerns regarding the objectivity and fitness of the committee for its assigned purpose,” Mr. Lowell said.
Mr. Trump, who has long sought more control over the central bank in a bid to lower borrowing costs, has signaled how he expects the committee to rule. When asked on Friday about the investigation into Ms. Cook, the president called her “dishonest” and said that if the committee found that there was cause to remove her, he would “absolutely” fire her.
“A hearing with demonstrably biased members, unspecified additional allegations, and an unclear schedule for the disclosure of any additional evidence — with no explanation for why it was not previously produced — is not a process that respects the appearance or history of independence,” Mr. Lowell said.
The decision to create a committee comes on the heels of a Supreme Court ruling that denied Mr. Trump the right to fire Ms. Cook after his initial attempt in August 2025. The justices in June ruled 5 to 4 in favor of Ms. Cook remaining in her job while litigation progressed, but they shied away from engaging in the substance of the claims against her and focused instead on procedural issues.
Mr. Trump quickly seized on that opening, announcing immediately after the Supreme Court ruling that he would continue his campaign against Ms. Cook, who has denied any wrongdoing and has not been charged with a crime despite the allegations being more than a year old.
On the surface, the investigation into Ms. Cook appears to comply with the Supreme Court’s demands that the Trump administration provide the Fed governor ample opportunity to respond and defend herself before proceeding with her ouster.
In a memo dated Oct. 7, the White House stipulated the scope of the investigation, detailed who from the administration would staff it, and declared deadlines for Ms. Cook to submit supporting documents and written statements. It also summoned her to attend the in-person hearing, warning that this could include questioning from Department of Justice personnel.
Christina Skinner, who recently stepped down as an official at the Treasury Department and is now back at the University of Pennsylvania as a professor, described the process as “robust,” noting that the president pulled in people from “different facets of the White House ecosystem,” while also giving Ms. Cook “several avenues” to respond.
But for Ms. Cook’s lawyers, the current setup falls far short.
One of their primary concerns centers on the people who Mr. Trump tapped for the committee.
Mr. Hassett, the president’s top economic adviser, has joined with Mr. Trump in frequent criticism of the Fed, which he recently faulted for an “unusually partisan” board after it chose to raise interest rates to control inflation, rather than cut them as the president has demanded.
He had been among the finalists to lead the central bank under Mr. Trump, but the president opted to keep Mr. Hassett in his current post because he viewed him as a reliable, vocal advocate for his agenda.
In the weeks after the administration first accused Ms. Cook of engaging in mortgage fraud, Mr. Hassett defended the power of the president to fire a Fed governor if he determines there is cause to do so. Last fall, Mr. Hassett describing the allegations against Ms. Cook as “serious” and called on Ms. Cook to take a leave of absence until they were resolved.
“The fact she’s not doing that now suggests she’s being partisan,” Mr. Hassett told reporters.
In his letter, Mr. Lowell pointed to past comments made by Mr. Hassett, noting that he “already has publicly insinuated that the President has ‘cause’ to fire Governor Cook.”
Mr. Sonderling, for his part, had previously endorsed Mr. Trump’s views on interest rates, echoing to CNBC recently that the Fed “should cut interest rates.” The Fed’s decision to raise rates came amid stubborn inflation that has exceeded the central bank’s 2 percent target for nearly six years.
Ms. Lucas has carried out Mr. Trump’s agenda at the E.E.O.C., chiefly by undoing what she has described as aggressive attempts by liberals to pursue diversity, equity and inclusion policies in the workplace. She has particularly focused on corporate discrimination against white male workers.
The post Lawyer for Fed Governor Cook Denounces Trump’s New Investigation appeared first on New York Times.
