Fact check: Have there been instances where a President removed a Federal Reserve chair?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, yes, there have been recent instances where a President attempted to remove a Federal Reserve chair. President Donald Trump attempted to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, marking what appears to be an unprecedented move in U.S. history ^{[1] [2]}. According to the sources, Trump is the first U.S. president to try to fire a Federal Reserve governor ^[3].

The removal attempt was based on allegations of mortgage fraud, with Trump citing a "criminal referral" from Federal Housing Finance Agency Director William Pulte ^[4]. However, Cook's attorney maintains that Trump has no authority to remove her and that she plans to challenge the action in court through a lawsuit ^{[1] [5] [2]}.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks several crucial pieces of context:

• Legal framework: Federal Reserve governors can only be removed "for cause" by law, which significantly limits presidential authority in this area ^[6]
• Historical precedent: This appears to be the first time in U.S. history that a president has attempted to remove a Federal Reserve governor, making it a historically significant event ^[3]
• Economic implications: Economists warn that interfering with the Fed's independence can lead to worse economic outcomes, suggesting broader consequences beyond the immediate political action ^[3]
• Legal challenges: The removal attempt faces immediate legal opposition, with Cook's legal team preparing to file a lawsuit challenging Trump's authority ^{[5] [4]}
• Specific allegations: The removal was not based on Cook's work at the Federal Reserve but on unrelated mortgage fraud allegations, and she hasn't been charged with any crime ^[5]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself appears neutral and factual, asking about historical instances rather than making claims. However, it could be misleading by omission as it:

• Uses the past tense "have there been instances" which might imply completed successful removals, when the current case involves only an attempt that is being legally challenged
• Doesn't distinguish between attempts and successful removals, which is a crucial distinction given that the legal authority for such removals is highly contested
• Fails to specify the unprecedented nature of even attempting such an action, which is significant context for understanding the gravity of the situation ^[3]

The question appears to be seeking factual information rather than promoting a particular narrative, but the framing could benefit from more precision about whether it's asking about successful removals versus attempts.