Supreme Court Lets Trump Resume Mass Federal Layoffs
On Tuesday, the court lifted an order from a lower court blocking the enforcement of a February executive order in which President Donald Trump laid out plans for large scale firings and layoffs across the government. The court ruled 7-2 to lift the order, with liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor joining conservatives in siding with the administration
In her concurrence with the majority, Sotomayor wrote that while 'the President cannot restructure federal agencies in a manner inconsistent with congressional mandates,' the 'relevant Executive Order directs agencies to plan reorganizations and reductions in force 'consistent with applicable law.'' Since the legality of the specific plans and methods were not directly before the court, the executive order was, in her view, within the powers of the president.
Fellow liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in a scathing dissent that the order — and plans outlined by the Trump administration — potentially usurped powers vested in Congress. The lower court had stayed the layoffs in order while it litigated the legal merits of the case, but, as Jackson wrote, 'that temporary, practical, harm-reducing preservation of the status quo was no match for this Court's demonstrated enthusiasm for greenlighting this President's legally dubious actions in an emergency posture.'
'This Court lacks the capacity to fully evaluate, much less responsibly override, reasoned lower court fact finding about what this challenged executive action actually entails,' Jackson added.
The decision is a victory for the Trump administration, whose efforts to gut the federal workforce and dismantle entire agencies has repeatedly been stymied by legal challenges and court rulings. When U.S. District Judge Susan Illston issued the preliminary injunction against Trump's February executive order, she stopped removals at over 20 agencies.
The Trump administration has gambled that it can litigate many of its more extreme, constitutionally dubious initiatives through the courts and come out on top. Once again, the Supreme Court has proven him correct.
More from Rolling Stone
Trump Voter Andrew Schulz Can't Believe Trump Isn't Doing What He Campaigned On
The DOJ's Epstein Memo Is Tearing the Trump Administration Apart
Blue States Invest Retirees' Savings in Firms Boosting Trump's Extreme Agenda
Best of Rolling Stone
The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign
Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal
The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Buzz Feed
a few seconds ago
- Buzz Feed
This Senator Made A Very, Very Good Point About Trump's Weird Comment About Gold
A bunch of Donald Trump's new tariffs went into effect on August 7. But there's one thing that won't be hit with a tariff, and that's gold. Yep, gold is off the table! Some people pointed how that this could be because of all of the gold in the Oval Office. Other people compared him to an Austin Powers villain. And this person said, "I miss when the federal government wasn't a meme." But one reply to Trump's post is going more viral than the rest, and it's from Senator Chris Coons of Delaware. Here's what he said: "Trump could have cancelled tariffs on groceries, clothing, back-to-school supplies – any one of a number of things that would have reduced costs for American families. Instead, he chose gold." NextGen America responded to that comment, "Trumponomics, simplified: More golden ballrooms for him, more tariffs for the rest of us." Thoughts?
Gizmodo
a few seconds ago
- Gizmodo
DOGE Has Continued to Waste Billions While Saving Almost Nothing: Reports
The Trump Administration's Department of Government Efficiency has been a project largely defined by ever-diminishing expectations. At the outset of DOGE's journey, its chief operator, Elon Musk, famously claimed, in a bout of wild optimism, that he hoped to cut 'at least' $2 trillion out of the federal budget. Not long after the election, Musk reduced his ambitions to $1 trillion. Throughout the first few months of Trump's second term, DOGE claimed to be saving Americans billions, but analyses repeatedly showed the organization was wildly inflating its savings and often making rudimentary math mistakes. In May, the billionaire claimed that DOGE had saved Americans $160 billion, but admitted that his org was 'not as effective' as he'd hoped. At the time, the New York Times reported that DOGE had only publicly accounted for $58 billion of the savings Musk alleged and that even those purported savings had been 'significantly inflated, by including outright errors and guesses about the future.' Now, yet another fact-checking effort aimed at Musk's initiative has resulted in greatly reduced facts and figures. An analysis by Politico claims that, of some $52.8 billion that DOGE purports to have saved Americans by cancelling various government contracts, only a fraction appears to have been realized. The report states that, of the savings bragged about on DOGE's 'Wall of Receipts' website, only '$32.7 billion in actual claimed contract savings' could be verified. On top of that, the news outlet found that 'DOGE's savings over that period were closer to $1.4 billion.' Politico further notes that none of those savings will lower the federal deficit unless Congress steps in. Instead, the money went back to the respective agencies to which it had been allotted. In other words, DOGE basically did nothing. The apparent blunder was achieved through a poor grasp of timetables, the report claims: DOGE's savings calculations are based on faulty math. The group uses the maximum spending possible under each contract as its baseline — meaning all money an agency could spend in future fiscal years. That amount can far exceed what the government has actually committed to pay out. Counting this 'ceiling value' gives a false picture of savings for taxpayers. 'That's the equivalent of basically taking out a credit card with a $20,000 credit limit, canceling it and then saying, 'I've just saved $20,000,'' said Jessica Tillipman, associate dean for government procurement law studies at George Washington University Law School. 'Anything that's been said publicly about [DOGE's] savings is meaningless.' Also relevant is another recent report that claims DOGE spent substantially more money attempting to downsize government than it saved by destroying public programs. Authored by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, the analysis claims that DOGE blew through some $21.7 billion in taxpayer money as it attempted to downsize the federal workforce. Between January and July, DOGE spent some $14.8 billion through its Deferred Resignation Program, which paid public employees 'not to work for up to eight months.' DOGE allegedly spent another $6 billion on '100,000 employees who have been involuntarily separated from federal service or who remain on prolonged periods of administrative leave pending separation, many of whom were paid to not do their jobs for weeks or months.' The organization spent hundreds of millions more on various inefficient and wasteful policies. The Senate committee notes that the amount that DOGE spent in this fashion is more than double the amount that DOGE has definitively culled from the government ($9 billion, via cuts to NPR, PBS, and foreign aid) through the rescission package voted for by Republicans this summer. Meanwhile, as DOGE has continued on with its questionable antics, its own staff have continued to suck taxpayer money out of the government. In March, NPR reported that $40 million in public funds had been apportioned for DOGE's activities, but much about the cost of the initiative remains unclear. That same month, Wired noted that some DOGE staffers were making six-figure government salaries for their slash-and-burn work. The money often appeared to be coming from the very agencies that DOGE was butchering, the outlet noted. If both the recent studies are accurate, they reveal the very ironic contours of DOGE and its activities—an organization that claims to be rooting out governmental waste and fraud, but whose operations appear wasteful and whose public statements are frequently, according to many journalistic analyses, fraudulent. At this point, it's unclear what the heck DOGE is even doing. The organization isn't dead, but with the loss of its Supreme Leader (Musk), its mandate has become increasingly unclear, and its activities are now shrouded in mystery. Like a computer virus, the organization continues to worm its way through the bureaucracy's guts, servicing nebulous projects, like the creation of a national citizenship database that has alarmed privacy activists. Some of DOGE's former members continue to prove useful to the administration in other ways. Last week, the 19-year-old former DOGE-ling known as 'Big Balls' (real name Edward Coristine) managed to get punched in the face by a group of juveniles while out for a stroll in the nation's capital, according to Washington D.C. police. The spectacle of Coristine's bloodied visage was shared widely on Musk's X platform and other social media sites, and the incident has since served as a justification for Trump's authoritarian-style federalization of local police forces in D.C. The episode shows that, while DOGE has been an utter trainwreck from a governance and policy standpoint, it continues to serve certain functions deemed critical to the success of the current regime: namely, those of the public relations (i.e., propaganda) department.
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Trump tells Europe he won't negotiate territory with Putin, say leaders
European leaders said President Trump on Wednesday said he would not negotiate territorial issues with Russian President Vladimir Putin at their summit in Alaska this week, saying it is an issue that must be discussed between Ukraine and Russia. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emanuel Macron both said Trump made the comments during a virtual meeting with European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Wednesday. Merz made the remarks alongside Zelensky, who came to Berlin for the call. The German leader said Trump told them that he wouldn't negotiate territorial issues and pledged to ask for an immediate ceasefire in the meeting, the Wall Street Journal reported citing two sources on the call. Macron similarly told reporters that Trump agreed with European leaders during the call that any talks on territorial concessions must involve Ukraine. Trump described the call with European leaders as 'very good, I would rate it a 10' when speaking to reporters at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday. He said there will be consequences for Putin if he does not agree to stop the war after their meeting in Alaska on Friday. Trump also sought to set expectations for the meeting, saying he didn't believe he has the power to get Putin stop attacking Ukrainian civilians. 'I've had that conversation with him, I've had a lot of good conversations with him and then I go home and I see that a rocket hit a nursing home, or a rocket hit an apartment building and people are laying dead in the street… but I guess the answer to that is probably no.' While Trump set an Aug 8 deadline for Putin to stop the war or face sanctions, the president allowed that deadline to pass in exchange for the face-to-face summit. Trump said the first meeting with Putin is an attempt to feel out the Russian leader's commitment to negotiations to end the war, but that the goal is to move toward a second summit with Zelensky, and possibly Trump too. 'There's a good chance we'll have a second meeting that will be more productive than the first – because the first I'll find out where we are and what we're doing,' he said.
