Latest news with #9thUSCircuitCourtofAppeals
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
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's Tierney Sneed and Paula Reid contributed to this report.
The Advertiser
3 days ago
- Business
- The Advertiser
US court won't lift block on Trump's govt overhaul
A US appeals court has refused to pause a judge's ruling blocking President Donald Trump's administration from carrying out mass layoffs of federal workers and a restructuring of government agencies as part of a sweeping government overhaul. The decision on Friday 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 programs. 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, non-profits and municipalities that the president may only restructure agencies when authorised by Congress. A three-judge 9th Circuit panel on Friday 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 White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "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," said a statement from the coalition of plaintiffs. The 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. 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 labour 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. A US appeals court has refused to pause a judge's ruling blocking President Donald Trump's administration from carrying out mass layoffs of federal workers and a restructuring of government agencies as part of a sweeping government overhaul. The decision on Friday 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 programs. 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, non-profits and municipalities that the president may only restructure agencies when authorised by Congress. A three-judge 9th Circuit panel on Friday 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 White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "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," said a statement from the coalition of plaintiffs. The 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. 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 labour 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. A US appeals court has refused to pause a judge's ruling blocking President Donald Trump's administration from carrying out mass layoffs of federal workers and a restructuring of government agencies as part of a sweeping government overhaul. The decision on Friday 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 programs. 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, non-profits and municipalities that the president may only restructure agencies when authorised by Congress. A three-judge 9th Circuit panel on Friday 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 White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "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," said a statement from the coalition of plaintiffs. The 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. 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 labour 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. A US appeals court has refused to pause a judge's ruling blocking President Donald Trump's administration from carrying out mass layoffs of federal workers and a restructuring of government agencies as part of a sweeping government overhaul. The decision on Friday 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 programs. 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, non-profits and municipalities that the president may only restructure agencies when authorised by Congress. A three-judge 9th Circuit panel on Friday 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 White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "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," said a statement from the coalition of plaintiffs. The 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. 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 labour 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.
Perth Now
3 days ago
- Business
- Perth Now
US court won't lift block on Trump's govt overhaul
A US appeals court has refused to pause a judge's ruling blocking President Donald Trump's administration from carrying out mass layoffs of federal workers and a restructuring of government agencies as part of a sweeping government overhaul. The decision on Friday 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 programs. 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, non-profits and municipalities that the president may only restructure agencies when authorised by Congress. A three-judge 9th Circuit panel on Friday 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 White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "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," said a statement from the coalition of plaintiffs. The 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. 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 labour 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.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Business Standard
Trump moves to end protections for immigrant children in federal custody
The Trump administration filed a motion on Thursday to end a policy cornerstone that since the 1990s has offered protections to child migrants in federal custody, in a move that likely will be challenged by advocates. The protections in place, known as the Flores Settlement, largely limit to 72 hours the amount of time that child migrants travelling alone or with family and detained by the US Border Patrol can be kept in US Customs and Border Protection custody. They also ensure the children are kept in safe and sanitary conditions. The Flores settlement is named for a Salvadoran girl, Jenny Flores, whose lawsuit alleging widespread mistreatment of children in custody in the 1980s prompted special oversight. This is the second time the federal government under Trump has attempted to end the policy. In August 2019, the first Trump administration asked a judge to dissolve the agreement. Its motion eventually was struck down in December 2020 by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals. Under the Biden administration, oversight protections for child migrants were lifted for the US Department of Health and Human Services after new guidelines were put in place last year. The Department of Homeland Security is still beholden to the agreement, including Customs and Border Protection, which detains and processes children after their arrival in the US with or without their parents. Children then are usually released with their families or sent to a shelter operated by HHS, though processing times often go up when the number of people entering increases in a short time period. Even with the agreement in place, there have been instances where the federal government failed to provide adequate conditions for children, as in a case in Texas where nearly 300 children had to be moved from a Border Patrol facility following reports they were receiving inadequate food, water and sanitation. Court-appointed monitors provide oversight of the agreement and report noncompliant facilities to Chief US District Judge Dolly M. Gee of the Central District of California. CBP was set to resume its own oversight but in January a federal judge ruled it was not ready and extended the use of court-appointed monitors for another 18 months.
Deccan Herald
07-05-2025
- Business
- Deccan Herald
Microsoft wins FTC appeal challenging $69 billion Activision Blizzard deal
The San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower judge's order that said the FTC was not entitled to a preliminary injunction blocking the deal, which closed in 2023.
