The recent firing of two Democratic Federal Trade Commission (FTC) commissioners, Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, by President Trump has sparked controversy and raised questions about the limits of presidential power. The move has been deemed illegal by many, citing a clear violation of Supreme Court precedent set in 1935's Humphrey's Executor v. US.

The situation has also highlighted the challenges faced by journalists in reporting on ongoing legal disputes and uncertain outcomes. News outlets, including The Verge, have been criticized for their headlines and language, which some argue have normalized or downplayed the illegality of the president's actions. The Verge's original headline, which put "illegal" in quotation marks, attributed the claim to the Democratic commissioners, rather than stating it as a fact.

However, as Sarah Jeong, features editor at The Verge, notes, there are no facts in dispute when it comes to the firings of Bedoya and Slaughter. The only thing in dispute is whether Humphrey's Executor is valid law. This raises concerns about the role of the Supreme Court, which has shown a willingness to overturn long-standing precedent, and the erosion of the rule of law.

The incident has also sparked a broader discussion about the importance of journalistic language and the need for clarity in reporting on legal disputes. Jeong acknowledges that editors have a responsibility to ensure that headlines accurately reflect the story, and that in this case, the headline should have been more direct in stating the illegality of the president's actions.

The controversy surrounding the firing of the FTC commissioners comes at a time when the Supreme Court has been expanding presidential immunity and the Trump administration has been pushing the limits of executive power. As Jeong notes, the case has pushed the basic craft of journalistic writing to its limits, highlighting the need for journalists to be clear and direct in their reporting, even in the face of uncertain outcomes.

The incident serves as a reminder of the importance of a free press in holding those in power accountable and ensuring that the rule of law is upheld. As Jeong concludes, "a news headline should not quietly aid the erosion of our social consensus about the law, even if we ourselves are struggling to do our jobs because of that erosion."

In a time when the boundaries of presidential power are being constantly tested, it is more important than ever for journalists to be clear, accurate, and direct in their reporting, and for readers to hold them accountable for doing so.