The state government of Mississippi is packed with agencies and commissions that are governed by independent boards and not by the governor.

President Donald Trump argues such independent boards on the federal level violate the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court recently heard arguments from the Trump administration on the issue, and a ruling next year in favor of the president would be far reaching and upend decades of judicial precedence.

Not long ago, a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court abolishing the independent or regulatory boards would have been far fetched, but no longer thanks to the current Supreme Court’s willingness to acquiesce to Trump’s whims.

Is the same possible in Mississippi?

Could Gov. Tate Reeves or some future governor challenge the constitutionality of the independent agencies in this state?

Perhaps. 

After all, anybody can file a lawsuit. And it often appears that whatever Trump does, Reeves and many Mississippi politicians want to emulate. But there are some distinct differences between the powers of the governor under the Mississippi Constitution and the powers of the president under the United States Constitution.

Granted, the U.S. Constitution and Mississippi Constitution are similar in terms of the president and the governor both commanding the military, having broad pardon authority and being able to request reports from agencies.

Both the U.S. Congress and the Mississippi Legislature have created agencies with governing board members appointed by either the governor or the president. Often, the board members serve staggered terms, preventing one chief executive officer from appointing all the members.

The purpose of the independent boards – especially on the national level – is to take politics out of the governance, such as with the Federal Election Commission, the Federal Reserve, the National Labor Relations Board, the National Science Board and a host of others.

Trump wants to be able to fire the board members if he does not like their policies.

Mississippi also has multiple instances of the Legislature creating a governance system where appointed board members hire the executive director and set the policies of the agency. The Department of Mental Health, the Department of Health and the Community College Board are examples where, for whatever reason, the Legislature opted to create an agency with the executive director reporting to the board members instead of the governor.

But there are differences between the Mississippi system and the national system.

Some of the independent agencies are created by the Mississippi Constitution (the people) and not by the Legislature.

The Board of Education, arguably one of the state’s more important boards, is created constitutionally with the members appointed by a combination of the governor, lieutenant governor and speaker of the House. The state’s eight public universities are governed by a constitutionally created Board of Trustees of state Institutions of Higher Learning. The board members serve staggered terms appointed by governors. In some rare instances, one governor elected to two terms could have all the appointments on the IHL Board.

Then, of course, there are statewide elected officials who oversee their agencies. Most of those state positions – the secretary of state, treasurer, auditor, attorney general – are created by the Constitution and do not answer to the governor. But the insurance commissioner and the commissioner of agriculture and commerce are not constitutional officers. They are legislatively created.

It is not certain the U.S. Supreme Court will grant Trump’s wishes and abolish the independent boards, but many judicial experts believe it is possible if not likely.

But what is certain is that Mississippi’s Republican leadership follows the lead of Trump.

Still, it is difficult to see a scenario where a Mississippi governor would take the issue to court.

First of all, it is highly unlikely that the Mississippi Supreme Court would find a board or agency created by the Mississippi Constitution to be unconstitutional. That would be a difficult position for a judge to take.

In addition, a governor who has a strong relationship with lawmakers might have better luck changing the governance of those independent agencies that are not in the Mississippi Constitution by going to the Mississippi Legislature instead of petitioning the Mississippi Supreme Court.

But in the current crazy political climate, it seems anything is possible.