Latest news with #KarenHenderson
Los Angeles Times
19-05-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Appeals court allows Trump's anti-union order to take effect
WASHINGTON — An appeals court has cleared the way for President Trump's executive order aimed at ending collective bargaining rights for hundreds of thousands of federal employees while a lawsuit plays out. The Friday ruling came after the Trump administration asked for an emergency pause on a judge's order blocking enforcement at roughly three dozen agencies and departments. A split three-judge panel in the nation's capital sided with government lawyers in a lawsuit filed by unions representing federal employees. The majority ruled on technical grounds, finding that the unions don't have the legal right to sue because the Trump administration has said it won't end any collective bargaining agreements while the case is being litigated. Judge Karen Henderson, appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush, and Justin Walker, appointed by Trump, sided with the government, while Judge Michelle Childs, appointed by Democratic President Biden, dissented. The government says Trump needs the executive order so his administration can cut the federal workforce to ensure strong national security. The law requiring collective bargaining creates exemptions for work related to national security, as in agencies like the FBI. Union leaders argue the order is designed to facilitate mass firings and exact 'political vengeance' against federal unions opposed to Trump's efforts to dramatically downsize the federal government. His order seeks to expand that exemption to exclude more workers than any other president has before. That's according to the National Treasury Employees Union, which is suing to block the order. The administration has filed in a Kentucky court to terminate the collective bargaining agreement for the Internal Revenue Service, where many workers are represented by the National Treasury Employees Union. They say their IRS members aren't doing national security work. Other union employees affected by the order include the Health and Human Services Department, the Energy Department, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Federal Communications Commission. Whitehurst writes for the Associated Press.
Boston Globe
19-05-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
Appeals court allows Trump's anti-union order to take effect
Judge Karen Henderson, appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush, and Justin Walker, appointed by Trump, sided with the government, while Judge Michelle Childs, appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, dissented. Advertisement The government says Trump needs the executive order so his administration can cut the federal workforce to ensure strong national security. The law requiring collective bargaining creates exemptions for work related to national security, as in agencies like the FBI. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Union leaders argue the order is designed to facilitate mass firings and exact 'political vengeance' against federal unions opposed to Trump's efforts to dramatically downsize the federal government. His order seeks to expand that exemption to exclude more workers than any other president has before. That's according to the National Treasury Employees Union, which is suing to block the order. The administration has filed in a Kentucky court to terminate the collective bargaining agreement for the Internal Revenue Service, where many workers are represented by the National Treasury Employees Union. They say their IRS members aren't doing national security work. Advertisement Other union employees affected by the order include the Health and Human Services Department, the Energy Department, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Federal Communications Commission.
The Independent
19-05-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Appeals court allows Trump's anti-union order to take effect
An appeals court has cleared the way for President Donald Trump 's executive order aimed at ending collective bargaining rights for hundreds of thousands of federal employees while a lawsuit plays out. The Friday ruling came after the Trump administration asked for an emergency pause on a judge's order blocking enforcement at roughly three dozen agencies and departments. A split three-judge panel in the nation's capital sided with government lawyers in a lawsuit filed by unions representing federal employees. The majority ruled on technical grounds, finding that the unions don't have the legal right to sue because the Trump administration has said it won't end any collective bargaining agreements while the case is being litigated. Judge Karen Henderson, appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush, and Justin Walker, appointed by Trump, sided with the government, while Judge Michelle Childs, appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, dissented. The government says Trump needs the executive order so his administration can cut the federal workforce to ensure strong national security. The law requiring collective bargaining creates exemptions for work related to national security, as in agencies like the FBI. Union leaders argue the order is designed to facilitate mass firings and exact 'political vengeance' against federal unions opposed to Trump's efforts to dramatically downsize the federal government. His order seeks to expand that exemption to exclude more workers than any other president has before. That's according to the National Treasury Employees Union, which is suing to block the order. The administration has filed in a Kentucky court to terminate the collective bargaining agreement for the International Revenue Service, where many workers are represented by the National Treasury Employees Union. They say their IRS members aren't doing national security work. Other union employees affected by the order include the Health and Human Services Department, the Energy Department, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Federal Communications Commission.
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Appeals court blocks Trump admin's deportation flights in Alien Enemies Act immigration suit
A federal appellate court declined to issue a stay on a lower court's orders in a suit challenging the Trump administration's authority to deport Venezuelan nationals via a 1798 wartime law. In a 2-1 decision Wednesday, a three-judge panel sided with the plaintiffs in the suit, further blocking the Trump administration's ability to move forward with its deportation agenda. Judges Karen Henderson, Patricia Millett and Justin Walker of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals presided over Monday's oral arguments, which they agreed to hear last week on an expedited basis. The back-and-forth Monday was dominated primarily by Millett, an Obama appointee, who seemed to be clearly on the plaintiffs' side. She sparred with Justice Department lawyer Drew Ensign over the Trump administration's implementation of the law in question, and whether the administration violated constitutional due process protections in possibly failing to allow individuals targeted for deportation enough time to seek habeas protections. In a concurring opinion of the ruling, Henderson, a Bush appointee, said: "At this early stage, the government has yet to show a likelihood of success on the merits. The equities favor the plaintiffs. And the district court entered the TROs for a quintessentially valid purpose: to protect its remedial authority long enough to consider the parties' arguments. 'Woefully Insufficient': Us Judge Reams Trump Admin For Days-late Deportation Info Read On The Fox News App "Accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons, the request to stay the district court's TROs should be denied." Their decision could ultimately be kicked to the Supreme Court for further review. Attorney General Pam Bondi sharply criticized lower court judges for involving themselves in immigration issues, vowing in an interview on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" to appeal the case to the Supreme Court for review if necessary. "This is an out-of-control judge, a federal judge, trying to control our entire foreign policy, and he cannot do it," Bondi said of the lower court decisions. At issue was the Trump administration's authority to invoke the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 wartime law, to immediately deport Venezuelan nationals, including alleged members of the Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang, from U.S. soil. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order last weekend blocking the Trump administration from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan nationals, citing the need to better consider the merits of the case — and prompting the administration to file an emergency request for the U.S. appeals court to intervene. Justice Department Tells Federal Judge It Might Invoke State Secrets Act On High-profile Deportation Case Boasberg also issued a bench ruling ordering the Trump administration to return any planes to the U.S. that were carrying Venezuelan nationals or any other migrants subject to deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. Despite his order, planes carrying hundreds of U.S. migrants, including Venezuelan nationals removed under the law, arrived in El Salvador hours later. The Trump administration had filed an emergency appeal of Boasberg's order that same day, describing his restraining order as a "massive, unauthorized imposition on the Executive's authority to remove dangerous aliens who pose threats to the American people" in its initial filing. During Monday's hearing, Justice Department lawyers were pressed by the appellate judges over the timing of the deportations, and whether the individuals deported under the law had any time to seek relief or challenge their status as a TdA member in the form of a habeas petition before they were sent to El Salvador. Millett told Justice Department attorney Drew Ensign that it appeared that there was not much time between Trump's signing of a proclamation that authorized the use of the Alien Enemies Act to immediately deport Venezuelan nationals believed to be members of TdA and its first wave of deportation flights to El Salvador. Trump Doj Hammers Judge's 'Digressive Micromanagement,' Seeks More Time To Answer 5 Questions If the Trump administration's argument is that the restraining order handed down by a lower court judge last week is "an intrusion on the president's war powers, and [that] the courts are paralyzed to do anything, then that's a misreading of precedent," Millett said. "And it's a misreading of the text of the Alien Enemies Act. The president has to comply with the Constitution and laws like everybody else," she added. Boasberg had ordered the Trump administration last week to submit more information to the court about its deportation flights as part of a fact-finding hearing to determine whether they knowingly defied his court order that blocked the deportations. The Justice Department repeatedly declined to do so, even after he offered the opportunity for them to do so under seal, prompting a scathing response from Boasberg last week. In a reply brief filed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, lawyers for the Trump administration argued that the district court is "continuing to attempt to pry sensitive information from the Government," describing the requests from Boasberg as "intrusive inquiries" and ones they said "could hamper negotiations in the future." Boasberg wrote that the government had submitted a six-paragraph declaration from a regional ICE office director in Harlingen, Texas, which notified the court that Cabinet secretaries are "actively considering whether to invoke the state secrets [act] privileges over the other facts requested by the Court's order." In a separate district court hearing, Boasberg pressed the government's attorneys, at one point questioning them on their credibility. "So, your clients had you come argue this but kept you in the dark about it," Boasberg said. "I often tell my clerks before they go out to practice law, that the most valuable thing they have is their reputation and their credibility. I would ask that your team retain that lesson." "The government isn't being forthcoming… but I will get to the bottom of if they complied with my order and who violated the order, and what the consequences are," Boasberg said during the article source: Appeals court blocks Trump admin's deportation flights in Alien Enemies Act immigration suit
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
DOJ Argues Trump Could Fire Every Woman Agency Head if He Wanted
Trump's Justice Department believes the president has the authority to fire agency heads based on age and gender, according to a report from Talking Points Memo. The stunning argument came during a testy court hearing Tuesday on Trump's firing of board members at the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board. 'Could the president decide that he wasn't going to appoint or allow to remain in office any female heads of agencies or any heads over 40 years old?' Judge Karen Henderson of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals asked Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric McArthur at one point in the arguments. 'I think that that would be within the president's constitutional authority under the removal power,' McArthur said. 'There would be separate questions about whether that would violate other provisions of the Constitution.' Lower courts have already ruled against Trump's firings of the board members, and the panel of three judges on Tuesday appeared skeptical of the Justice Department's reasoning. But the Trump administration welcomes these challenges so that it can drive its aggressive policies to the nation's highest court, where they have an overwhelming ideological advantage.
