Trump’s mass firings of federal workers must remain on hold, court rules

Trump’s executive order regarding the firings ‘far exceeds the President’s supervisory powers under the Constitution,’ ruled the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

A federal appeals court ruled on Friday night that President Donald Trump’s orders for mass removals of federal staff and several agencies will remain on hold.

The Trump administration had requested that the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals freeze an earlier order from a lower court that put a stop to the mass firings at several agencies, CNN noted.

The new court order is a significant step back for the president and his attempt to radically reduce the size of the federal government.

The widespread firings, known as reductions in force (RIFs), have remained on hold since May 9, following the earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Illston stating that Trump needed congressional authorization for such a wholesale makeover of the federal government.

The three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit stated in a two-to-one ruling that Trump’s executive order in question “far exceeds the President’s supervisory powers under the Constitution.”

The majority found that the challengers could succeed on the merits of their arguments that the mass firings were illegal, and argued that the administration didn’t manage to meet the other factors that would have prompted an emergency appellate intervention.

Trump previously asked that the Supreme Court take on the case handling his mass firings of federal staffers (AP)

The president had previously requested that the Supreme Court take on the case. That request didn’t go anywhere initially. It’s likely, however, that the issue will end up before the top court in the land once more.

The case was put forward by unions representing federal employees, outside groups, and local governments. They challenged the executive order Trump signed in February, which called for a widespread restructuring of the government, along with directives from the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget to enact the president’s policy.

The offices asked that agencies send in plans for how they would implement Trump’s order to slash the workforce.

The challengers argued that both OPM and OMB were making the final decisions on the size of the firings for each agency. They put forward evidence that proposals for less radical cuts were being shot down, making the firings illegal. The lawsuit also took aim at the involvement of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The agencies covered by the previous ruling by Illston, halting the firings, include almost every cabinet department, such as the departments of Energy, Health and Human Services, Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, Interior, State, Labor, and Treasury.

The 9th Circuit said on Friday that Congress, not the president, gave agencies the power to enact widespread firings.

Bill Clinton appointee, Senior Circuit Judge William Fletcher, said in the majority ruling that the “kind of reorganization contemplated by the Order has long been subject to Congressional approval.”

Fletcher was joined in the majority by a Joe Biden appointee, Circuit Judge Lucy Koh. Dissenting from the ruling was George W. Bush appointee Circuit Judge Consuelo Maria Callahan, who wrote that “the President has the right to direct agencies, and OMB and OPM to guide them, to exercise their statutory authority to lawfully conduct RIFs.”

“We are gratified by the court’s decision today to allow the pause of these harmful actions to endure while our case proceeds,” the groups challenging the president’s orders said in a statement, CNN noted.