# Trump and his allies target the Federal Reserve's independence again > According to Reuters, the June 2026 jobs report published on July 2 showed only 57,000 jobs created, along with a downward revision - Author: Maxime Marquette - Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co) - Section: Editorial - Published: 2026-07-06 - Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/trump-et-ses-allies-s-attaquent-encore-a-l-independance-de-la-reserve-federale ## Introduction: pressure that never really lets up ### A weak jobs report reignites the tension According to **Reuters**, the **June 2026** jobs report published on **July 2** showed only **57,000 jobs** created, along with a downward revision of **74,000 jobs** for April and May, a fragile economic signal that directly feeds **Donald Trump**'s criticism of the **Federal Reserve**. This isn't an isolated incident: according to **Bloomberg**, **Trump**'s allies are stepping up efforts to influence the **Fed**'s composition and decisions, in a climate where the president publicly criticizes a **monetary policy** he considers too restrictive for the American economy. ### Why this editorial is taking a clear stand I'm going to be direct: this kind of repeated pressure on an institution meant to stay independent from electoral cycles isn't just a legitimate difference of economic opinion. It's a systematic attempt to place political power above a fundamental institutional check. This editorial isn't claiming **Trump** is always wrong on economic substance, but it refuses to turn a blind eye to a methodical drift that weakens one of the most important pillars of Western economic stability. *I'll say it plainly: no matter who occupies the White House, a central bank under direct political influence is a central bank that will eventually lose the trust of markets and citizens alike. This principle should never be negotiable.* *This editorial won't be gentle, but it will stay factual from start to finish. Criticizing **Trump**'s domestic overreach has nothing to do with denying his sometimes justified positions on the international geopolitical stage.* ## Fragile economic numbers being used as a political weapon ### A labor market weaker than it appears According to **Reuters**, the American **unemployment** rate slightly dropped to **4.2%** in June, down from **4.3%** the previous month, but this apparent decline hides a more troubling reality: it's largely explained by workers dropping out of the **labor force** entirely rather than by any real sustained job creation. The **labor force** shrank by roughly **700,000 people** in June, and by roughly **1.3 million** since January 2025, meaning there were about **1.5 million fewer workers** in June 2026 than at the start of **Trump**'s second term, according to data cited by **Reuters**. ### A drop in **unemployment** for the wrong reasons Job site **Glassdoor**'s chief economist, **Daniel Zhao**, sums up the problem well: "the drop in the **unemployment** rate to 4.2% is good news for bad reasons: it was caused by people leaving the **labor force**, not by more hiring," an analysis that directly contradicts the triumphalist narrative some of **Trump**'s allies are trying to build around these numbers. It's precisely this kind of complex statistical nuance that political pressure on the **Fed** risks flattening: a nuanced economic picture becomes a blunt weapon to justify **interest rate** cuts demanded more for electoral reasons than for rigorous macroeconomic ones. *Using a weakened labor market as an excuse to demand a more docile **Fed** is exploiting real economic hardship for purely political ends. That cynicism deserves to be called out bluntly.* ## What **Kevin Warsh**'s position as the Fed's new chair reveals ### Asserted **independence**, but under constant pressure The **Federal Reserve**'s new chair, **Kevin Warsh**, stated on **CNBC** on **July 1, 2026** that the **Fed** would remain independent despite pressure from **Trump**, a public statement that, in itself, shows just how visible this pressure has become — visible enough to require a direct institutional response. **Warsh** also said at a European economic panel that "growth potential appears to have increased" while acknowledging that "hours worked in the labor market are relatively stable," an analytical caution that sharply contrasts with the more assertive tone often used by **Trump**'s political allies. ### A perilous institutional balancing act The very fact that a newly appointed **Fed** chair has to publicly reassure markets about his **independence** shows just how concerning the political pressure from **Trump**'s circle has become, threatening the American central bank's perceived institutional credibility. This situation puts **Kevin Warsh** in a delicate position: should he appear too conciliatory toward the White House, risking undermining international market confidence, or too rigid, risking the direct wrath of an administration that has never hidden its contempt for institutional checks? ***Kevin Warsh** is caught between two fires, and that's exactly the situation an administration that despises institutions wants to create: making Fed independence politically costly to defend publicly.* ## The worrying precedent of plans to weaken the Fed's independence ### Proposals already documented to give **Trump** a direct role Earlier **Wall Street Journal** reports documented concrete proposals developed by people close to **Trump** to give him a direct advisory role in setting **interest rates**, including the idea that the future **Fed** chair would regularly consult the president before negotiating **monetary policy** with the rate-setting committee. Those same reports even mention the idea, deemed far-fetched by some of **Trump**'s own associates according to the **Wall Street Journal**, that the president could hold a seat on the **Fed**'s board of governors, a proposal that illustrates the scale of ambition some in the presidential circle have for transforming the very nature of this institution. ### A desire to extend control beyond just **interest rates** These plans aren't limited to interest rate policy: they also call for the White House to gain more power over the regulations the **Fed** independently establishes, a change that would break with decades of institutional practice in which the central bank crafts its rules without direct executive oversight. Some advisers even believe several of these measures could be implemented without **Congress**'s approval, a claim that, if accurate, would dangerously bypass the constitutional checks and balances of the United States. *Bypassing **Congress** to seize an independent monetary institution is exactly the kind of drift Western democracies must refuse to normalize, regardless of the economic pretext used to justify it.* ## The broader context of Trump's trade and tariff tensions ### Multifaceted economic pressure on several fronts at once This offensive against the **Fed** fits into a broader context of economic tension maintained by the **Trump** administration, including tense tariff negotiations with several trade partners and a missed deadline for renegotiating the **North American trade agreement**, according to the **Washington Post**. This context of persistent trade tension feeds precisely the kind of economic uncertainty **Trump** then cites to demand more aggressive interest rate cuts from the **Fed**, creating a convenient logical loop where his own trade policies justify his monetary pressure. ### A strategy that shifts economic blame onto other institutions This dynamic lets **Trump** shift the blame for any economic slowdown onto a **Fed** deemed too rigid, rather than owning the economic consequences of his own tariff and trade decisions, a clever but fundamentally dishonest political communication strategy toward the American public. It's this pattern of systematically shifting blame that makes a genuinely independent **Fed** all the more necessary, one capable of resisting political pressure to maintain a **monetary policy** grounded in economic data rather than electoral imperatives. *Creating economic uncertainty yourself through erratic tariff policies, then blaming the Fed for not sufficiently offsetting that uncertainty, is a political maneuver as clever as it is cynical.* ## Why Fed independence remains an essential pillar for the West ### International credibility that directly depends on this independence The **American dollar**'s credibility as the world's reserve currency rests largely on the international perception that the **Federal Reserve** makes its decisions based on rigorous economic criteria rather than short-term electoral imperatives, a reputation patiently built over decades and potentially weakened by this repeated pressure. Eroding this perceived independence would send a worrying signal to international financial markets and Western allies, who have always viewed American institutional stability as a fundamental pillar of the Western-led global economic order. ### An issue that goes far beyond American domestic politics alone This fight for the **Fed**'s independence isn't just an American domestic political matter: it directly touches the stability of the entire Western financial system, since several allied economies depend closely on American monetary policy decisions. That's why this editorial refuses to treat this issue as a simple partisan debate between Republicans and Democrats: it's a fundamental institutional matter that concerns all Western democracies committed to the separation of economic and political power. *Defending Fed independence isn't partisan politics, it's basic institutional defense. Western democracies cannot afford to normalize the erosion of their own economic checks and balances.* ## A necessary evil whose domestic overreach must still be called out ### Recognizing the merits without excusing the excesses This editorial isn't claiming **Trump** lacks all merit in his geopolitical stance toward the West's strategic rivals: on several international issues, his firmness has served Western interests against adversaries like **China**, **Russia**, or **Iran**. But acknowledging that geopolitical merit should never serve as an excuse to overlook his domestic overreach, particularly this methodical pressure on institutions like the **Fed**, which silently weaken the democratic and institutional foundations that underpin the very strength of the West he claims to defend. ### Vigilance that must remain constant, no matter the administration This editorial vigilance shouldn't be limited to **Trump** either: any administration, regardless of partisan allegiance, that tried to weaponize the **Federal Reserve** for electoral purposes would deserve equally firm condemnation from observers committed to Western institutional strength. It's this consistency in defending institutions, beyond momentary partisan sympathies, that distinguishes honest political commentary from mere propaganda dressed up as economic analysis. *I would remain just as critical if a future Democratic president tried the same thing with the Fed. Defending institutions can never be applied selectively depending on who holds power.* ## What financial markets are already signaling about this pressure ### Palpable nervousness among institutional investors American bond markets are already watching every public statement related to **Fed** independence very closely, a nervousness that reflects the very real fear that sustained political pressure will eventually translate into a less predictable monetary policy, dictated more by the election calendar than by economic fundamentals. This institutional uncertainty has a real economic cost: it complicates companies' and investors' ability to plan for the long term, an indirect cost that advocates of a more docile **Fed** toward the White House seem to largely ignore in their argument. ### A very real risk of losing international confidence Several international economists, cited in **Reuters**' coverage of the **Sintra** economic summit, expressed reservations about the **Fed**'s ability to maintain its institutional credibility if American political pressure keeps intensifying at the pace seen since the start of 2026. This international concern isn't trivial: it reflects a worry shared by several foreign central bankers who depend, directly or indirectly, on the predictable stability of American monetary policy to guide their own national economic decisions. *When foreign central bankers start publicly worrying about American institutional strength, that's a sign this internal battle already has consequences well beyond U.S. borders.* ## Conclusion: defending Fed independence without partisan indulgence ### A reminder of the fundamental stakes involved The renewed pressure from **Trump** and his allies on the **Federal Reserve**, documented by **Bloomberg** and **Reuters** in early July 2026, against a backdrop of fragile economic data and persistent trade tensions, constitutes a real and documented threat to the American central bank's institutional independence. This threat deserves to be named clearly, without denying the geopolitical merits **Trump** can otherwise claim on other international issues against the West's genuine strategic rivals. ### A call for continued institutional vigilance The West's economic and democratic strength will depend, in the years ahead, on its collective ability to defend its fundamental institutions against any attempt at political weaponization, no matter who occupies the White House when that temptation arises. It's this constant vigilance, exercised without partisan indulgence in either direction, that will let the West preserve the credibility of its economic institutions in an increasingly uncertain world. **By Maxime Marquette, columnist** ## Columnist's transparency note ### Editorial stance I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies. I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events. ### Method and sources This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here. **Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies. **Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations. When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**. ### Nature of the analysis The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted. My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors. This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text. ## Sources ### Primary sources - Trump Allies Double Down on Efforts to Reshape Federal Reserve — Bloomberg, July 2, 2026 - Weak jobs, declining labor force, could renew Fed debate — Reuters, July 2, 2026 ### Secondary sources - Trump ignores deadline extending USMCA, seeks improved deal — Washington Post, July 1, 2026 - Kevin Warsh says Fed will stay independent despite Trump pressure — CNBC, July 1, 2026 - Coverage of Trump's tariffs — Financial Times - Trump Tariff Tracker — Baker Botts, July 2, 2026 --- Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/trump-et-ses-allies-s-attaquent-encore-a-l-independance-de-la-reserve-federale