Monitor the appeals court ruling and whether the administration complies with any adverse decision—judicial defiance would escalate constitutional risk significantly.
This scores as List A (56-35=+21 margin) because it represents genuine institutional conflict: executive shutdown of an independent consumer protection agency facing judicial scrutiny. The separation of powers driver scores high (4) as courts challenge executive overreach, and institutional capture (4) reflects attempted agency neutralization. The judicial pushback itself is constitutionally significant, demonstrating checks-and-balances functioning under stress. B-score is moderate because while it generates some media attention, it's a substantive legal proceeding rather than theatrical distraction.