President Donald Trump said late Monday he was removing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook "effective immediately," citing "deceitful and potentially criminal conduct" linked to allegations that she claimed two different properties as her primary residence on mortgage forms. The dismissal, delivered in a letter addressed to Cook and Fed Chair Jerome Powell and posted on the president’s social-media account, is the first time in the central bank’s 111-year history that a sitting governor has been fired by a president. Cook, the first Black woman to serve on the Board of Governors and whose term runs to 2038, rejected the move through her attorney. In a statement, she said "no cause exists" for termination under the Federal Reserve Act and asserted the president "has no authority" to remove her. Legal scholars expect a swift court challenge that could clarify the scope of presidential power over independent agencies and test the Fed’s political autonomy. If the ouster stands, Trump would gain a second vacancy on the seven-member board, giving him the opportunity to assemble a 5-2 majority once his nominee Stephen Miran is confirmed. Such a shift could accelerate pressure for interest-rate cuts that the White House has urged as growth moderates and the impact of a 145 % tariff on Chinese goods filters through the economy. Financial markets reacted quickly. The Dollar Index slid as much as 0.4% before stabilising, the yen jumped to about ¥146 per dollar, and gold touched a two-week high. The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose to 4.30% while the two-year yield eased toward 3.69%, steepening the curve. Japan’s Nikkei 225 fell roughly 600 points, and U.S. equity futures turned lower as traders priced in an 82% probability of a Federal Reserve rate cut at the September meeting. Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, called the action an "authoritarian power grab" and said courts should overturn it. Supporters of the president argue the statute’s "for-cause" clause gives him ample authority. The Federal Reserve, which had no immediate public response, now faces an institutional confrontation that could reshape both its leadership and its credibility with investors.