Latest news with #Congressional
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Appeals court keeps pauses on Trump's mass firings at 21 agencies
May 31 (UPI) -- An three-judge federal appeals panel has kept in place a lower court's decision to pause the Trump administration's plans to downsize the federal workforce through layoffs. Late Friday, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision denied an emergency motion by the federal government to stay U.S. District Judge Susan Illston's order on May 9 that halted terminations at 21 agencies. The layoffs are called reductions in force, or RIFs. In a 45-page ruling, the appeals court in California wrote the challengers likely will win the case on the merits. The appeal panel said the Trump executive order on Feb. 13 "far exceeds the President's supervisory powers under the Constitution." The Trump administration has also asked the Supreme Court to decide and has not acted. "A single judge is attempting to unconstitutionally seize the power of hiring and firing from the Executive Branch," White House spokesman Harrison Fields told CNN in a statement. "The President has the authority to exercise the power of the entire executive branch - singular district court judges cannot abuse the power of the entire judiciary to thwart the President's agenda." Ruling for the plaintiffs were Senior Circuit Judge William Fletcher, an appointee of President Bill Clinton and Lucy Koh, selected by President Joe. Consuelo Maria Callahan, an appointee of President George W. Bush, wrote in her dissent that "the President has the right to direct agencies, and OMB and OPM to guide them, to exercise their statutory authority to lawfully conduct RIFs." Fletcher wrote: "The kind of reorganization contemplated by the Order has long been subject to Congressional approval." Illston, who was nominated by President Bill Clinton and serves in San Francisco, had backed the lawsuit by labor unions and cities filed on April 28, including San Francisco, Chicago, Baltimore and Harris County in Houston. She questioned whether Trump's administration was acting lawfully in reducing the federal workforce and felt Congress should have a role. "The President has the authority to seek changes to executive branch agencies, but he must do so in lawful ways and, in the case of large-scale reorganizations, with the cooperation of the legislative branch," Illston wrote after hearing arguments from both sides. "Many presidents have sought this cooperation before; many iterations of Congress have provided it. Nothing prevents the President from requesting this cooperation -- as he did in his prior term of office. Indeed, the Court holds the President likely must request Congressional cooperation to order the changes he seeks, and thus issues a temporary restraining order to pause large-scale reductions in force in the meantime." The coalition of organizations suing told CNN said after the appeals decision: "We are gratified by the court's decision today to allow the pause of these harmful actions to endure while our case proceeds." After Trump's executive order, the Department of Government Efficiency submitted a Workforce Optimization Initiative and the Office of Personnel Management also issued a memo. During Trump's first 100 days in office, at least 121,000 workers have been laid off or targeted for layoffs, according to a CNN analysis. There are more than 3 million workers among civilian and military personnel. Some of them have taken buyouts, "including those motivated to do so by the threat of upcoming RIFs," according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. That includes 10,000 at the Department of Health and Human Services through RIF as part of a plan to cut 20,000 employees. That includes 20% of the workforce of the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The agencies, run by Cabinet-level personnel, sued were Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Justice, Labor, State and Treasury, Transportation, Veterans Affairs. The Education Department, which Trump wants to dismantle, was not listed, but 50% of the workforce has been let go. Six additional agencies with statutory basis elsewhere in the United States Code were named: AmeriCorps, General Services Administration, National Labor Relations Board, National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration and Environmental Protection Agency. Elon Musk, who officially left Friday as special White House adviser, was named in the suit. Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Appeals court keeps pauses on Trump's mass firings at 21 agencies
May 31 (UPI) -- An three-judge federal appeals panel has kept in place a lower court's decision to pause the Trump administration's plans to downsize the federal workforce through layoffs. Late Friday, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision denied an emergency motion by the federal government to stay U.S. District Judge Susan Illston's order on May 9 that halted terminations at 21 agencies. The layoffs are called reductions in force, or RIFs. In a 45-page ruling, the appeals court in California wrote the challengers likely will win the case on the merits. The appeal panel said the Trump executive order on Feb. 13 "far exceeds the President's supervisory powers under the Constitution." The Trump administration has also asked the Supreme Court to decide and has not acted. "A single judge is attempting to unconstitutionally seize the power of hiring and firing from the Executive Branch," White House spokesman Harrison Fields told CNN in a statement. "The President has the authority to exercise the power of the entire executive branch - singular district court judges cannot abuse the power of the entire judiciary to thwart the President's agenda." Ruling for the plaintiffs were Senior Circuit Judge William Fletcher, an appointee of President Bill Clinton and Lucy Koh, selected by President Joe. Consuelo Maria Callahan, an appointee of President George W. Bush, wrote in her dissent that "the President has the right to direct agencies, and OMB and OPM to guide them, to exercise their statutory authority to lawfully conduct RIFs." Fletcher wrote: "The kind of reorganization contemplated by the Order has long been subject to Congressional approval." Illston, who was nominated by President Bill Clinton and serves in San Francisco, had backed the lawsuit by labor unions and cities filed on April 28, including San Francisco, Chicago, Baltimore and Harris County in Houston. She questioned whether Trump's administration was acting lawfully in reducing the federal workforce and felt Congress should have a role. "The President has the authority to seek changes to executive branch agencies, but he must do so in lawful ways and, in the case of large-scale reorganizations, with the cooperation of the legislative branch," Illston wrote after hearing arguments from both sides. "Many presidents have sought this cooperation before; many iterations of Congress have provided it. Nothing prevents the President from requesting this cooperation -- as he did in his prior term of office. Indeed, the Court holds the President likely must request Congressional cooperation to order the changes he seeks, and thus issues a temporary restraining order to pause large-scale reductions in force in the meantime." The coalition of organizations suing told CNN said after the appeals decision: "We are gratified by the court's decision today to allow the pause of these harmful actions to endure while our case proceeds." After Trump's executive order, the Department of Government Efficiency submitted a Workforce Optimization Initiative and the Office of Personnel Management also issued a memo. During Trump's first 100 days in office, at least 121,000 workers have been laid off or targeted for layoffs, according to a CNN analysis. There are more than 3 million workers among civilian and military personnel. Some of them have taken buyouts, "including those motivated to do so by the threat of upcoming RIFs," according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. That includes 10,000 at the Department of Health and Human Services through RIF as part of a plan to cut 20,000 employees. That includes 20% of the workforce of the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The agencies, run by Cabinet-level personnel, sued were Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Justice, Labor, State and Treasury, Transportation, Veterans Affairs. The Education Department, which Trump wants to dismantle, was not listed, but 50% of the workforce has been let go. Six additional agencies with statutory basis elsewhere in the United States Code were named: AmeriCorps, General Services Administration, National Labor Relations Board, National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration and Environmental Protection Agency. Elon Musk, who officially left Friday as special White House adviser, was named in the suit.
Indian Express
6 hours ago
- Business
- Indian Express
Tariff Tracker, May 31: Court restores status quo, only for Trump to stir the pot again
Dear reader, In the previous Tracker, we pointed out that very few things remain static in the realm of all things Donald Trump. In the intervening period, the US President has managed to secure a stay on the order holding his tariffs 'unlawful', accused China of violating the terms of a tariff truce the two nations agreed to earlier this month, and promised to double tariffs on US steel and aluminium imports to 50%. These developments come amidst his battle with universities, chiefly Trump's criticism of Harvard University for failing to control what he describes as 'antisemitic' hate speech, and protests criticising Israel in its war against Palestine. On Wednesday (May 28), Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a vague proclamation that the US would 'aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.' The move will impact roughly 275,000 Chinese students in the United States, about 20% of all student visa holders. On Wednesday, a three-judge panel of the US Court of International Trade ruled that Trump had exceeded his presidential authority in using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 1977 (IEEPA) to tariff nations. As explained in the May 29 Tariff Tracker, the judges ruled as illegal Trump's use of emergency powers to impose tariffs on virtually every country. The law, used by presidents of yore to impose emergencies, has been used thus far in a sanctionary capacity, bypassing Congressional approval. In question were two sets of tariffs: This order was stayed by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Thursday (May 29), allowing the status quo to persist. This means the Trump administration would not need to immediately wind up all three sets of tariffs listed above. However, this matter will likely be heard in the Supreme Court, where a final word is awaited. The Wednesday ruling brought to the fore Trump's continuing tussle with the judiciary, including with judges he appointed. Also of note, this ruling does not affect other sector-specific Trump tariffs, including: On Friday (May 30), Trump accused China of reneging on the agreement it made with the US earlier this month. In a post on TruthSocial, he wrote, 'China, perhaps not surprisingly to some, HAS TOTALLY VIOLATED ITS AGREEMENT WITH US. So much for being Mr. NICE GUY!' While he did not specify what the purported violations were, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told CNBC later that day that China had been slow to remove its non-tariff barriers or 'countermeasures' in response to Trump's tariff announcements. The countermeasures included restricting exports of rare earth minerals, which are vital inputs in several tech products and defence items, as well as the blacklisting of American companies. 'We haven't seen the flow of some of those critical minerals as they were supposed to be doing,' Greer said. Meanwhile, the US suspended some sales of critical technology to China, taking both nations a step closer to 'supply chain warfare', The New York Times reported Wednesday. A Bloomberg report on Friday claimed that the Trump administration will double down on this, with officials framing a rule to impose US licensing requirements on deals with subsidiaries of companies already sanctioned by the government. By choking off access to vital inputs needed by companies in both countries, the move could revive the trade war and send markets spiralling downward once again. The US and China had agreed to reduce tariffs on each other by 115%, effective May 14, for 90 days. This reduced effective US tariffs on China from 145% to 30%, and Chinese tariffs on the US from 125% to 10%. On Friday, Trump announced that he would double the Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminium from 25% to 50%, effective from June 4. 'We're going to bring it from 25 per cent to 50 per cent, the tariffs on steel into the United States of America, which will even further secure the steel industry,' he said at a Pennsylvania rally. 'Nobody is going to get around that … At 25 per cent, they can sort of get over that fence. At 50 per cent, they can no longer get over the fence,' he added, referring to the tariffs as a fence to boost domestic metals production. This development comes a week after Trump endorsed a contentious $15 billion partnership between Japanese company Nippon Steel and US Steel. He had earlier opposed the same while campaigning for President. Former President Joe Biden had earlier blocked the potential acquisition of the beleaguered American steel company by Nippon, citing a national security risk. Trump described the deal between the two countries as a 'blockbuster agreement' with a 'great partner' that he said would 'ensure this storied American company stays an American company'.
UPI
6 hours ago
- Politics
- UPI
Appeals court keeps pauses on Trump's mass firings at 21 agencies
1 of 2 | Federal workers and protesters hold signs and form a picket line in New York Citty on March 25. File photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo May 31 (UPI) -- An three-judge federal appeals panel has kept in place a lower court's decision to pause the Trump administration's plans to downsize the federal workforce through layoffs. Late Friday, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision denied an emergency motion by the federal government to stay U.S. District Judge Susan Illston's order on May 9 that halted terminations at 21 agencies. The layoffs are called reductions in force, or RIFs. In a 45-page ruling, the appeals court in California wrote the challengers likely will win the case on the merits. The appeal panel said the Trump executive order on Feb. 13 "far exceeds the President's supervisory powers under the Constitution." The Trump administration has also asked the Supreme Court to decide and has not acted. "A single judge is attempting to unconstitutionally seize the power of hiring and firing from the Executive Branch," White House spokesman Harrison Fields told CNN in a statement. "The President has the authority to exercise the power of the entire executive branch - singular district court judges cannot abuse the power of the entire judiciary to thwart the President's agenda." Ruling for the plaintiffs were Senior Circuit Judge William Fletcher, an appointee of President Bill Clinton and Lucy Koh, selected by President Joe. Consuelo Maria Callahan, an appointee of President George W. Bush, wrote in her dissent that "the President has the right to direct agencies, and OMB and OPM to guide them, to exercise their statutory authority to lawfully conduct RIFs." Fletcher wrote: "The kind of reorganization contemplated by the Order has long been subject to Congressional approval." Illston, who was nominated by President Bill Clinton and serves in San Francisco, had backed the lawsuit by labor unions and cities filed on April 28, including San Francisco, Chicago, Baltimore and Harris County in Houston. She questioned whether Trump's administration was acting lawfully in reducing the federal workforce and felt Congress should have a role. "The President has the authority to seek changes to executive branch agencies, but he must do so in lawful ways and, in the case of large-scale reorganizations, with the cooperation of the legislative branch," Illston wrote after hearing arguments from both sides. "Many presidents have sought this cooperation before; many iterations of Congress have provided it. Nothing prevents the President from requesting this cooperation -- as he did in his prior term of office. Indeed, the Court holds the President likely must request Congressional cooperation to order the changes he seeks, and thus issues a temporary restraining order to pause large-scale reductions in force in the meantime." The coalition of organizations suing told CNN said after the appeals decision: "We are gratified by the court's decision today to allow the pause of these harmful actions to endure while our case proceeds." After Trump's executive order, the Department of Government Efficiency submitted a Workforce Optimization Initiative and the Office of Personnel Management also issued a memo. During Trump's first 100 days in office, at least 121,000 workers have been laid off or targeted for layoffs, according to a CNN analysis. There are more than 3 million workers among civilian and military personnel. Some of them have taken buyouts, "including those motivated to do so by the threat of upcoming RIFs," according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. That includes 10,000 at the Department of Health and Human Services through RIF as part of a plan to cut 20,000 employees. That includes 20% of the workforce of the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The agencies, run by Cabinet-level personnel, sued were Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Justice, Labor, State and Treasury, Transportation, Veterans Affairs. The Education Department, which Trump wants to dismantle, was not listed, but 50% of the workforce has been let go. Six additional agencies with statutory basis elsewhere in the United States Code were named: AmeriCorps, General Services Administration, National Labor Relations Board, National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration and Environmental Protection Agency. Elon Musk, who officially left Friday as special White House adviser, was named in the suit.
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump's mass firings at several agencies will remain on hold, appeals court rules
President Donald Trump's directives for mass firings at multiple agencies will remain on hold, a federal appeals court ruled Friday evening. The Trump administration had asked the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to freeze a lower court's order that halted the terminations at more than a dozen agencies. The new order is a major setback for Trump in his efforts to drastically shrink the federal government. His plans for the sweeping layoffs – known as reductions in force, or RIFs – have been on hold since May 9, after US District Judge Susan Illston ruled that Trump could not do such a dramatic overhaul of federal agencies without congressional authorization. In its 2-1 opinion, the 9th Circuit panel said the Trump executive order at issue in the case '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 and said the administration failed to meet the other factors that would have justified the emergency appellate intervention. Trump already once asked the Supreme Court to get involved in the case – a request that initially went nowhere – and it is likely the dispute will eventually reach the high court again. CNN has reached out to the White House for comment. The case was brought by federal employees unions, local governments and outside groups. They challenged the February executive order that commanded a sweeping restructuring of the federal government, as well as directives issued by the Office of Personnel Management and Office of Management and Budget to implement Trump's policy. Those offices requested agencies submit plans for how they'll implement Trump's downsizing directive. The challengers argued that OPM and OMB were getting the final say on the scope of each agency's layoffs – putting forward evidence that agency proposals for less drastic cuts were being vetoed – making the terminations and reorganizations unlawful. Their lawsuit also targets the involvement of the Department of Government Efficiency in the mass terminations. Among the agencies covered by Illston's earlier order blocking the layoffs are nearly every Cabinet-level department, including the departments of Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, Interior, Labor, State and Treasury. On Friday, the 9th Circuit said that while Congress gave agencies the authority to undertake major layoffs, it did not give the president that power. Writing for the majority, Senior Circuit Judge William Fletcher said, 'The kind of reorganization contemplated by the Order has long been subject to Congressional approval.' Fletcher, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, was joined in the majority by Circuit Judge Lucy Koh, who was put on the appeals court by President Joe Biden. Circuit Judge Consuelo María Callahan, an appointee of President George W. Bush, dissented from the ruling, writing that 'the President has the right to direct agencies, and OMB and OPM to guide them, to exercise their statutory authority to lawfully conduct RIFs.' The coalition of organizations challenging Trump's directives said in a statement that 'We are gratified by the court's decision today to allow the pause of these harmful actions to endure while our case proceeds.' This story has been updated with additional details.
