Latest news with #9thCircuit
Fast Company
5 hours ago
- Business
- Fast Company
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow federal layoffs
President Donald Trump's administration on Monday renewed its request for the Supreme Court to clear the way for plans to downsize the federal workforce, while a lawsuit filed by labor unions and cities proceeds. The high court filing came after an appeals court refused to freeze a California-based judge's order halting the cuts, which have been led by the Department of Government Efficiency. By a 2-1 vote, a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that the downsizing could have broader effects, including on the nation's food-safety system and health care for veterans. In her ruling last month, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston found that Trump's administration congressional approval to make sizable reductions to the federal workforce. The administration initially asked the justices to step in last month, but withdrew its appeal for technical, legal reasons. The latest filing is one in a series of emergency appeals arguing federal judges had overstepped their authority. Illston's order 'rests on the indefensible premise that the President needs explicit statutory authorization from Congress to exercise his core Article II authority to superintend the internal personnel decisions of the Executive Branch,' Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in the new appeal. Trump has repeatedly said voters gave him a mandate to remake the federal government, and he tapped billionaire ally Elon Musk to lead the charge through DOGE. Musk left his role last week. Tens of thousands of federal workers have been fired, have left their jobs via deferred resignation programs, or have been placed on leave. There is no official figure for the job cuts, but at least 75,000 federal employees took deferred resignation, and thousands of probationary workers have already been let go. Illston's order directs numerous federal agencies to halt acting on the president's workforce executive order signed in February and a subsequent memo issued by DOGE and the Office of Personnel Management. Illston was nominated by former Democratic President Bill Clinton. Among the agencies affected by the order are the departments of Agriculture, Energy, Labor, the Interior, State, the Treasury and Veterans Affairs. It also applies to the National Science Foundation, Small Business Association, Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency. The Supreme Court set a deadline of next Monday for a response from the unions and cities, including Baltimore, Chicago and San Francisco. Some of the labor unions and nonprofit groups are also plaintiffs in another lawsuit before a San Francisco judge challenging the mass firings of probationary workers. In that case, Judge William Alsup ordered the government in March to reinstate those workers, but the U.S. Supreme Court later blocked his order.
CNN
7 hours ago
- Business
- CNN
Trump returns to Supreme Court with emergency appeal over mass firings
The Trump administration returned to the Supreme Court on Monday to ask the justices to reverse a lower court order that has blocked mass firings and major reorganizations at federal agencies, a case that could have enormous implications for the president's power to reshape the federal government. The latest emergency appeal involving President Donald Trump's second term to reach the Supreme Court followed an order last week from the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals that kept on hold Trump's plans for the sweeping layoffs – known as reductions in force, or RIFs. 'Controlling the personnel of federal agencies lies at the heartland' of the president's authority, US Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the Supreme Court in the appeal. 'The Constitution does not erect a presumption against presidential control of agency staffing, and the president does not need special permission from Congress to exercise' his core constitutional powers. The lawsuit was filed by more than a dozen unions, non-profits and local governments, which are billing it as the largest legal challenge to the Trump administration's effort to downsize the federal workforce. A senior administration official told CNN last month that it is watching the case closely because of its significance for allowing Trump to reduce the size of and restructure the federal government. Trump had asked the Supreme Court to wade into the case once before, but the Department of Justice withdrew the appeal days later when a federal district court issued a more fulsome order blocking Trump from proceeding. In its 2-1 opinion denying Trump's request to pause that district court order, the 9th Circuit panel said the Trump executive order at issue 'far exceeds the president's supervisory powers under the Constitution.' The majority concluded that the challengers were likely to succeed on the merits of their arguments that the mass layoffs were unlawful. The case stems from an executive order, which Trump signed in mid-February, that kicked off the process of the federal employees' mass culling. Agencies, which are working with the Department of Government Efficiency to carry out the mandate, were required to file reorganization plans with the administration earlier this year. But the unions have complained that the details of those plans have not been shared. Already, at least 121,000 federal workers have been laid off or targeted for layoffs since Trump took office, according to a CNN analysis. The figure doesn't include those placed on administrative leave or those who took voluntary buyouts. The order covers major reductions at more than a dozen agencies, including the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Labor, Treasury, State, Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs and the Environmental Protection Agency.
CNN
7 hours ago
- Business
- CNN
Trump returns to Supreme Court with emergency appeal over mass firings
The Trump administration returned to the Supreme Court on Monday to ask the justices to reverse a lower court order that has blocked mass firings and major reorganizations at federal agencies, a case that could have enormous implications for the president's power to reshape the federal government. The latest emergency appeal involving President Donald Trump's second term to reach the Supreme Court followed an order last week from the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals that kept on hold Trump's plans for the sweeping layoffs – known as reductions in force, or RIFs. 'Controlling the personnel of federal agencies lies at the heartland' of the president's authority, US Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the Supreme Court in the appeal. 'The Constitution does not erect a presumption against presidential control of agency staffing, and the president does not need special permission from Congress to exercise' his core constitutional powers. The lawsuit was filed by more than a dozen unions, non-profits and local governments, which are billing it as the largest legal challenge to the Trump administration's effort to downsize the federal workforce. A senior administration official told CNN last month that it is watching the case closely because of its significance for allowing Trump to reduce the size of and restructure the federal government. Trump had asked the Supreme Court to wade into the case once before, but the Department of Justice withdrew the appeal days later when a federal district court issued a more fulsome order blocking Trump from proceeding. In its 2-1 opinion denying Trump's request to pause that district court order, the 9th Circuit panel said the Trump executive order at issue 'far exceeds the president's supervisory powers under the Constitution.' The majority concluded that the challengers were likely to succeed on the merits of their arguments that the mass layoffs were unlawful. The case stems from an executive order, which Trump signed in mid-February, that kicked off the process of the federal employees' mass culling. Agencies, which are working with the Department of Government Efficiency to carry out the mandate, were required to file reorganization plans with the administration earlier this year. But the unions have complained that the details of those plans have not been shared. Already, at least 121,000 federal workers have been laid off or targeted for layoffs since Trump took office, according to a CNN analysis. The figure doesn't include those placed on administrative leave or those who took voluntary buyouts. The order covers major reductions at more than a dozen agencies, including the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Labor, Treasury, State, Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs and the Environmental Protection Agency.
CBS News
7 hours ago
- Business
- CBS News
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to let it move forward with mass layoffs of federal workforce
Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Washington — President Trump's administration asked the Supreme Court on Monday to allow it to move forward with its plans to lay off thousands of federal workers at nearly two dozen agencies while a legal battle over the president's plans to drastically cut the size of the government moves forward. The Justice Department's request for emergency relief is the second in which it has asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the ongoing dispute over its efforts to execute reductions-in-force, or layoffs, across the executive branch. The administration initially asked the Supreme Court to halt a two-week temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, but withdrew its request after she granted longer relief last month. That preliminary injunction issued by Illston prevented the Trump administration from implementing planned reductions-in-force, placing employees on administrative leave and proceeding with job cuts that are already in motion. The Justice Department's latest request for the Supreme Court's intervention comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit declined last week to halt Illston's order, which would have allowed the administration to resume its efforts to sharply scale down the size of the federal workforce. Solicitor General D. John Sauer said in a filing that the district court's order is "flawed" and rests on an "indefensible premise," namely that the president needs authorization from Congress to oversee personnel decisions within the executive branch. "It interferes with the Executive Branch's internal operations and unquestioned legal authority to plan and carry out RIFs, and does so on a government-wide scale," he wrote. "More concretely, the injunction has brought to a halt numerous in-progress RIFs at more than a dozen federal agencies, sowing confusion about what RIF-related steps agencies may take and compelling the government to retain — at taxpayer expense — thousands of employees whose continuance in federal service the agencies deem not to be in the government and public interest." Mr. Trump began taking steps to shrink the government shortly after he returned to the White House. The president created DOGE, a cost-cutting task force that was led by Elon Musk, and his administration began working to dismantle agencies like the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, though they have been met with court challenges. In February, Mr. Trump issued an executive order directing agencies to make plans to initiate "large-scale" reductions-in-force. On the heels of the president's directive, the Office of Personnel Management and Office of Management of Budget issued a memo directing agencies to submit plans for two phases of job cuts. Several department heads began executing their workforce cuts earlier this year, with thousands of federal employees losing their jobs. Other federal entities are planning to make significant reductions in the coming weeks and months. The reductions-in-force are separate from the mass terminations of probationary workers, who generally were in their positions for one or two years. But those firings, which took place in February, have also been the focus of lawsuits. In response to Mr. Trump's executive order, labor unions, nonprofit groups and local governments sued nearly every federal agency to block the layoffs, arguing that the executive order exceeded the president's authority and violated the separation of powers. A federal district judge in San Francisco agreed to issue a temporary restraining order, and she extended that relief with a preliminary injunction. Illston's order covers 21 federal agencies and DOGE, and prevents them from implementing reductions-in-force, placing employees on administrative leave and proceeding with job cuts that are already in motion. The judge also barred agencies from implementing any orders by DOGE to cut programs or staff in connection with Mr. Trump's February executive order. The agencies affected include the Departments of Health and Human Services and Veterans Affairs, as well as AmeriCorps and the Social Security Administration, among others. In a 51-page ruling, Illston wrote that presidents do have the authority to seek changes to federal agencies, and nine presidents have over the last century sought to reorganize the executive branch — but only after obtaining approval from Congress. "Presidents may set policy priorities for the executive branch, and agency heads may implement them. This much is undisputed," the judge said. "But Congress creates federal agencies, funds them, and gives them duties that — by statute — they must carry out. Agencies may not conduct large-scale reorganizations and reductions in force in blatant disregard of Congress's mandates, and a president may not initiate large-scale executive branch reorganization without partnering with Congress." The Justice Department asked the 9th Circuit to lift Illston's injunction, and in a divided 2-1 decision, it refused to do so. "The Executive Order at issue here far exceeds the president's supervisory powers under the Constitution," the appeals court wrote. "The president enjoys significant removal power with respect to the appointed officers of federal agencies."
Malay Mail
3 days ago
- Business
- Malay Mail
US court blocks Trump's mass layoffs and agency restructuring plans, White House likely to appeal to Supreme Court
Appeals court denies White House bid to stay May 22 decision Ruling prevents Trump administration from shedding jobs, shuttering offices White House likely to ask Supreme Court to pause May ruling WASHINGTON, May 31 — A US appeals court yesterday refused to allow President Donald Trump's administration to carry out mass layoffs of federal workers and a restructuring of agencies, leaving a lower court order in place that blocked the sweeping government overhaul. The decision by the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals means that, for now, the Trump administration cannot proceed with plans to shed tens of thousands of federal jobs and shutter many government offices and programmes. US District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco on May 22 blocked large-scale layoffs at about 20 federal agencies, agreeing with a group of unions, nonprofits and municipalities that the president may only restructure agencies when authorised by Congress. A 9th Circuit three-judge panel yesterday, in a 2-1 ruling, denied the Trump administration's bid to stay Illston's decision pending an appeal, which could take months to resolve. The administration will likely now ask the US Supreme Court to pause the ruling. 'The Trump administration will immediately fight back against this absurd order,' the White House said in a statement. 'A single judge is attempting to unconstitutionally seize the power of hiring and firing from the Executive Branch.' A coalition of plaintiffs praised the ruling: 'The Ninth Circuit's decision today rightfully maintains the block on the Trump-Vance administration's unlawful, disruptive, and destructive reorganisation of the federal government.' The appeals court said the administration had not provided any evidence it would suffer an irreparable injury if the lower court order remained in place and said plaintiffs were likely to prevail. 'The executive order at issue here far exceeds the president's supervisory powers under the Constitution,' said the majority opinion from Judge William Fletcher, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton. He was joined by Judge Lucy Koh, who was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden. Judge Consuelo Callahan, who was appointed by Republican President George W. Bush, dissented, saying the administration was likely to succeed on appeal and had suffered irreparable harm from having its policy blocked. Government overhaul Illston's ruling was the broadest of its kind against the government overhaul that was spearheaded by Trump ally Elon Musk, the world's richest person and CEO of electric vehicle maker Tesla. Along with blocking layoffs, Illston barred the Department of Government Efficiency from ordering job cuts or reorganisation at federal agencies. Dozens of lawsuits have challenged DOGE's work on various grounds, including claims that it violated labor and privacy laws and exceeded its authority, with mixed results. Two judges had separately ordered the Trump administration to reinstate thousands of probationary employees, who are typically newer hires and were fired en masse in February, but appeals courts paused those rulings. Musk joined a farewell event in the Oval Office with Trump yesterday, marking the end of his active involvement with the administration. Trump in February also directed government agencies to work with DOGE to identify targets for mass layoffs as part of the administration's restructuring plans. The Republican president urged agencies to eliminate duplicative roles, unnecessary management layers and non-critical jobs, while automating routine tasks, closing regional offices and reducing the use of outside contractors. Most federal agencies have announced plans to lay off large numbers of workers, including 10,000 staffers at health agencies. In yesterday's case, the unions and groups that sued said only Congress has the authority to create agencies, shape their missions and decide their funding levels, and that large-scale layoffs undermine that power. Illston, also an appointee of Clinton, had said in her ruling that the plaintiffs were likely to suffer a range of irreparable harms if the layoffs were implemented. She said, for example, that a US Department of Labor office in Pittsburgh that researches health hazards facing mineworkers would lose all but one of its 222 employees. Illston gave similar examples at local offices of Head Start, which supports early learning, the Farm Service Agency and the Social Security Administration. — Reuters
