A federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Trump administration from proceeding with its planned layoffs of federal employees during the ongoing government shutdown. The order comes from Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, who determined that the reduction-in-force (RIF) notices sent to approximately 4,000 employees last Friday were “both illegal and in excess of authority.”
The ruling specifically bars the administration from “taking any action to issue any reduction-in-force notices to federal employees … during or because of the federal government shutdown.” This order affects all federal programs and activities involving bargaining unit members represented by two unions that encompass more than 30 government agencies. Additionally, the ruling prevents agencies from administering or implementing any RIF notices issued on October 10 until further notice.
In her decision, Judge Illston provided the defendant agencies with two business days to supply a comprehensive list of all actual or proposed RIF plans. She highlighted concerns that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) may have overstepped their bounds and ignored the regulations due to the government shutdown.
The Trump administration had previously secured clearance from the Supreme Court to move forward with earlier rounds of layoffs. However, Illston expressed that the evidence suggested the current administration might be taking advantage of the shutdown to impose changes they wished to pursue without adherence to the existing laws.
While Trump administration officials initially reported sending RIF notices to about 4,200 federal employees, they later corrected this figure after rescinding many notices, indicating confusion within the agencies. Judge Illston remarked on the lack of coherence in communication from the administration, pointing out that revised declarations from officials indicated significant inconsistencies regarding the situation’s specifics.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth Hedges, defending the administration, explained that many agencies involved had not made conclusive decisions about issuing RIFs, emphasizing a degree of discretion among the agencies. Conversely, Danielle Leonard, the attorney representing the unions in the lawsuit, argued that the decisions to lay off employees were already predetermined by high-ranking officials, including OMB Director Russ Vought.
In response to the ongoing shutdown, President Trump remarked that the situation “shouldn’t have happened,” positioning it as an opportunity to dismantle programs he disagreed with. He asserted that his administration would utilize this time to roll back what he described as “Democrat programs.”
As developments unfold, it is evident that the legal battles regarding federal employment and the implications of the shutdown will continue to evolve. The intricacies involved reflect ongoing tensions between government agencies and various levels of leadership, signaling an uncertain future for many federal employees.