President Donald Trump was furious about the July jobs report, which pointed to a significant economic slowdown, when he resurfaced an old grievance: the statistician responsible for compiling the monthly numbers had been appointed by former President Joe Biden.
Unlike Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell — whom Trump had criticized for months — the president has the authority to dismiss the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). So, he did just that last Friday — an unprecedented move that sparked the latest White House controversy and raised concerns about the politicization of government economic data.
“I was thinking about it this morning, before the numbers came out,” Trump told reporters Friday. “I said: ‘Who’s the person that puts these numbers together?’”
That person, whom Trump abruptly made a household name by firing her publicly, is Erica McEnturfer.
While some of the president’s economic advisors sought to provide context for the disappointing July report — and the sharp downward revisions to May and June figures signaling a slowdown in hiring — it was the view of Sergio Gor, head of presidential employment affairs and a top Trump loyalist, that resonated most: she was a Biden appointee.
Sources familiar with the dismissal said Trump had previously expressed frustration that such a critical data-producing agency was led by someone appointed by his predecessor. That alone, they said, had bothered him, but until Friday, he didn’t see a clear justification for removing her.
That changed after Friday’s report, when Trump informed several top advisors that he wanted McEnturfer fired. According to two White House officials, no one objected to the decision.
“She’s gone,” Trump told reporters. “And you know what? I did the right thing.”
The latest attempt to undermine facts
With that, a new conspiracy theory was born in the White House, as Trump claimed — without evidence — that McEnturfer had “manipulated” the monthly jobs report.
McEnturfer, who did not respond to requests for comment, had spent decades as a government statistician at the Census Bureau and other federal institutions, specializing in labor market and economic data. In a speech this January at the Atlanta Economic Club, she emphasized the importance of timely economic data.
“I’ve long been interested in measuring economic indicators,” she said. “But like anyone who has lived through the past five years, I’ve come to value timely and reliable economic data even more.”
Her firing became the latest example of Trump’s efforts to discredit facts that clash with his political narrative — or to remove the officials responsible for producing them. Largely absent from the uproar was any serious discussion of the actual state of the US labor market, which is showing warning signs amid uncertainty fueled by Trump’s tariffs.
Trump’s decision drew immediate condemnation from economists across the political spectrum, who called the move “damaging,” “authoritarian,” and “banana republic-style.”
William Beach, whom Trump appointed during his first term to lead the BLS, said: “I don’t believe there’s any basis for this firing. It harms the statistical system and undermines trust in the office.”
Officials said what angered Trump most about the report were the large downward revisions to previous months — which he publicly claimed, without proof, were politically motivated.
A White House official told CNN: “That’s what set him off. He saw the revisions and knew something was wrong — that they’d been changed that sharply. And this isn’t the first time. Given how many companies base decisions on this data, it’s something that needs fixing.”
But contrary to Trump’s insinuations, the revisions are not evidence of a political conspiracy. They are a standard part of the monthly jobs report process. When survey response rates are low, early estimates become more uncertain, so the BLS continues gathering payroll data after the report is released and updates the figures later.
Why is mcEnturfer different from Powell?
Earlier this year, Trump had privately discussed with aides whether he could fire Jerome Powell. His advisors warned him against it, citing not only questionable legality but also the broader implications for the economy, given Powell’s independence from the executive branch.
But many of those same officials told Trump that removing McEnturfer — who serves “at the pleasure of the president” — was legally justifiable, even if the BLS is traditionally considered a nonpartisan agency.
The White House sent officials to television networks to defend the decision, offering a range of explanations — none of which provided clear evidence for Trump’s claim that the numbers were “fake” or “manipulated” to make him look bad.
On Sunday, Trump said he would name a new commissioner to lead the bureau within days, referring to the role as “the statistician.” He did not explain how this new appointee would address what his team sees as flaws in the way employment data is gathered and compiled.
BLS leaders are typically drawn from government agencies, research institutions, or universities, and are rarely well-known figures before or during their tenure.
Officials said Trump is seeking someone “highly qualified” to take the role and “modernize” the bureau’s methods — but any nominee is expected to face intense scrutiny during the Senate confirmation process. Even some Republicans have expressed concerns over the sudden firing.
As of Monday, Trump had not made a final decision on who would replace McEnturfer, according to a senior White House official. Top advisors expected to play a key role in the selection process include White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, Treasury Secretary Scott Biscent, and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.
In a CNN “State of the Union” interview, William Beach warned that McEnturfer’s successor would struggle to gain credibility — even though Trump claims the goal is to restore trust in the data.
“Let’s say they appoint a new commissioner — man or woman — and they’re one of the best candidates possible. If bad numbers come out, people will assume it’s not as bad as it seems because they’ll expect political influence,” he said. “That’s damaging — and it’s not what we need right now.”
Domestic and international reactions
Trump’s decision didn’t appear to face broad internal opposition, though economists from both parties condemned the move, warning that it could erode confidence in vital economic statistics.
Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-Dreamer said in a Fox Business interview Monday: “It’s my duty to support the president on this, and I do. We have to assure the American people that they can trust this data. It’s influential — it moves markets and shapes investments.”
Just hours before Trump’s announcement on Friday, Chavez-Dreamer had stated that “the jobs report offers further proof that the American people are seeing real progress.”
Other members of the president’s economic team backed the decision. Many were quick to draw a connection between problems with jobs data and Powell’s decision to hold interest rates steady — something that has long frustrated Trump — arguing that Fed policymakers aren’t receiving accurate information.
In several interviews since Friday, Hassett claimed that partisan bias had crept into the jobs reports, though he provided no evidence. Speaking on Fox News, he said: “Data shouldn’t be propaganda” — but gave no details to support the idea that McEnturfer or any of the hundreds of statisticians at the agency had manipulated the numbers.
In another interview with CNBC on Monday, he implied the BLS had become just another institution entrenched in resistance to Trump.
“There are people all over the US government trying to resist Trump in every way they can,” he said.
Like many Trump administration officials, Hassett had spent the first Friday of each month touting the jobs reports, viewing consistent hiring gains as a sign of a strong economy. Trump himself had regularly posted online whenever the reports showed six-figure gains, never questioning the data when it reflected a healthy labor market.
In June, Trump posted about that month’s report: “Great jobs numbers — and the stock market is soaring! Billions in tariffs flowing in too!!” But after Friday’s dismal report, Trump ordered McEnturfer’s dismissal.
“… then there’s a problem”
The uproar over her firing subsided somewhat over the weekend, though several members of Congress voiced concerns before departing Washington for their summer recess.
Senator Cynthia Lummis, Republican of Wyoming, said: “If the president is firing the statistician because the numbers are unreliable, it’s good to know the reason. But if he’s firing her because he doesn’t like the numbers — even if they’re accurate — then that’s a problem.”
Economists and statisticians defended McEnturfer, stressing that her removal would create a troubling erosion of trust in critical economic data. In her January speech in Atlanta, she acknowledged the growing difficulties in preparing the monthly jobs report due to declining response rates from businesses and workers.
“Our goal at the Bureau of Labor Statistics is to modernize official statistics for the 21st century,” she said, “and to put them on a sustainable path for the future.”
