Government
Judge Blocks Trump Administration From Firing Workers During Shutdown
The ongoing government shutdown has temporarily shuttered facilities, but a federal judge ordered officials to halt layoffs and pause the clock on notices that have already been issued.
A federal judge blocked the Trump administration from carrying out mass firings during the ongoing government shutdown until a lawsuit brought by unions looking to challenge the “reductions-in-force” is resolved. The judge wrote in her order that the unions are likely to succeed in their claims.
The order from US District Court Judge Susan Illston in California grants the unions’ requests to block further shutdown-related layoffs and pauses the clock on RIF notices that were already issued. The order builds on a temporary injunction the judge had previously issued to prevent firings of the unions’ government worker members.
“If what plaintiffs allege is true, the agencies’ actions in laying off thousands of public employees—and in targeting those from a particular political party—during a government shutdown is the epitome of hasty, arbitrary and capricious decisionmaking,” Illston wrote.
Ahead of the shutdown, which started Oct. 1, the White House Office of Management and Budget directed federal agencies to consider RIFs during a lapse in appropriations.
However, the judge noted that comments from President Donald Trump have repeatedly highlighted firings as a means to punish Democrats over the shutdown, such as when he posted on social media that he was "meeting with OMB Director Russell Vought to determine which of the many Democrat agencies, most of which are a political scam, he recommends to be cut, and whether or not those cuts will be temporary or permanent,” or when Trump said in a speech that Vought is “cutting Democrat priorities and they’re never going to get them back.”
Vought has said upwards of 10,000 government workers could be targeted for RIFs.
The American Federation of Government Employees and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees initially filed a suit challenging the RIFs on Sept. 30, and they have since been joined by six other unions representing government workers.
Looking for quick answers on construction and engineering topics?
Try Ask ENR, our new smart AI search tool.
Ask ENR →
The Trump administration has argued that the president has the power to conduct layoffs, and that the plaintiffs have not demonstrated that they face irreparable harm. But Illston wrote the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that the White House’s direction to consider RIFs was not based on legal grounds.
In her order, Illston noted that RIFs have gone out with errors in them, such as incorrect service dates, benefit calculations and even the divisions where impacted employees work. While a RIF notice would typically provide a 60-day period before termination, employees have been unable to use the time to meet with human resources or organize records because staff who would assist them have also received RIF notices. Some employees were not even aware they had received notices because they had been unable or told to not access their work email during the shutdown.
“The record before the court paints a chaotic picture, with employees wondering what is happening and no one at the agencies able to guide them,” the judge wrote.
“This is not only a win for the dedicated federal workforce who make up our nonpartisan civil service, but a victory for the American people and the public services our communities and our economy count on,” said Matt Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, a union participating in the suit.
Some employees received RIF notices earlier in the year and were terminated, but then were reinstated and have received another RIF notice during the shutdown.
“During all that time, including during my combat deployment, I have never gone through anything as traumatizing as what I am now experiencing," one US Air Force veteran working at the US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development told the court.
