
Federal appeals court refuses to lift ruling halting mass layoffs at Department of Education
The unanimous decision from the 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals is another significant legal setback for President Donald Trump, whose efforts to rapidly shrink the federal government – including through dismantling entire agencies – have been tied up in numerous court challenges.
Cutting the Department of Education has been of particular interest to Trump in his second term. Earlier this year, he moved ahead with mass layoffs at the agency, which is tasked with distributing federal aid to schools, managing federal aid for college students and ensuring compliance with civil rights laws.
The administration, 1st Circuit Chief Judge David Barron wrote for the panel, has not 'shown that the public's interest lies in permitting a major federal department to be unlawfully disabled from performing its statutorily assigned functions.'
The court also said that the administration had not demonstrated that it was likely to ultimately win in the case, with Barron writing that Justice Department attorneys had not put forth evidence showing how the widespread layoffs at the department would not prevent it from carrying out its core functions.
Last month, US District Judge Myong Joun of the federal court in Boston indefinitely halted Trump's plans to dismantle the agency and ordered the administration to reinstate employees who had been fired en masse. The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by a teachers' union, school districts, states and education groups.
Noting that the department 'cannot be shut down without Congress's approval,' Joun, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, said that the planned layoffs at the agency 'will likely cripple' it.
'The record abundantly reveals that Defendants' true intention is to effectively dismantle the Department without an authorizing statute,' he wrote in the 88-page ruling.
Attorneys for the Department of Justice quickly asked the Boston-based appeals court to pause Joun's ruling while they appealed it, writing in court papers that it 'represents an extraordinary incursion on the Executive Branch's authority to manage its workforce.'
'Beyond that, it requires the government to indefinitely retain and pay employees whose services it no longer requires, and the government cannot recoup those salaries if it prevails on appeal,' the DOJ attorneys wrote.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
a few seconds ago
- Fox News
Democrats are 're-orienting' themselves to 'kitchen-table' issues: Richard Fowler
Bluestack Strategies founder Maura Gillespie and Fox News contributor Richard Fowler unpack Democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani's call with former President Barack Obama on 'Fox News Live.'


Fox News
a few seconds ago
- Fox News
Newsom pushes plan to redraw congressional districts in California
Seattle radio host Jason Rantz joins 'Fox News Live' to discuss California Gov. Gavin Newsom's push to redraw congressional maps in his state.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
PARKER: Companies on the move to escape California blues
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is upset with Texas. There's a reason he should be upset. California companies are pulling up in droves and moving to the Lone Star State and elsewhere. But that isn't what's bothering him. Newsom cares about politics and power, not markets and business. He's upset that the Texas state legislature is moving to redistricting, which could add up to five Republican seats in 2026. So, Newsom wants to redistrict, which could add another five Democratic seats in California. California's congressional districts are already gerrymandered to death to favour Democrats — 17% of the State's 52 congressional seats are held by Republicans in a state in which Donald Trump garnered 38% of the popular vote in 2024. In ballot initiatives in 2008 and 2010, Californians amended the state constitution to establish an independent redistricting commission, with five representatives from each party and four unaffiliated, to take rote politics out of the process. But removing rote politics for Gavin Newsom is like asking the L.A. Dodgers to show up for a game without bats, balls and gloves. Newsom wants to circumvent the commission by putting new district maps for 2026 before voters in a special ballot initiative this November. It is too bad that Newsom's obsession is with accumulating power rather than improving his state. Just listen to Orange County resident and much-followed economist and blogger Scott Grannis. From Grannis' latest post, which he calls California Leavin': 'Between 2020 and 2025, approximately 500 companies have moved their headquarters out of California or shifted significant operations elsewhere, with a notable spike in relocations since 2019. From 2018 to 2021 alone, the Hoover Institution reported 352 companies relocating their headquarters out of the state.' Grannis continues: 'Government has become increasingly lazy and dysfunctional; the roads are a mess, traffic is the bane of everyday existence, taxes and regulations are oppressive, and modest cottages start at $1 million.' U-Haul annually reports its U-Haul Growth Index. This ranks the 50 states according to 'each state's net gain (or loss) of customers utilizing one-way U-Haul equipment in a calendar year.' Which state was first in one-way departures out of the state for the last five years? Yes, you're right. California Leavin'. And what state was number two in the nation in arrivals into the state in 2024? Yes, Texas, the Lone Star State. Texas has ranked first or second every year since 2016. According to of the top five cities in the U.S. with new corporate headquarters openings from 2018 to 2024, three are in Texas — Dallas, Austin and Houston. The other two are in Nashville and Phoenix. All five are in red states in 2024. In the top five cities for corporate headquarters closures from 2018 to 2024, three of the five are in California. San Diego, Greater Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area. The other two are Chicago and New York City. All five are in blue states in 2024. Harvard's Joint Center for Housing Studies documents which states had the largest migration gains from 2014 to 2024 and which states had the largest losses. Of the top 10 that gained over this period, seven of the 10 were red states in 2024. Of the top 10 losers over this period, seven of the 10 were blue states in 2024. Needless to say, Texas is in the top 10 gainers. It is a state that is booming because it provides a tax and regulatory environment conducive to those who want to work and grow. It makes all the sense in the world, with the huge influx of businesses and people, that the Texas population landscape has changed dramatically since the last census. There is a rationale for the redistricting initiative in Texas. But in California, Newsom just wants to institutionalize failure. Let's hope, in the interest of Californians, that he doesn't manage to get this misguided initiative on the ballot. And if he does, that it fails.