Judge temporarily blocks plans for mass layoffs

Eileen Sullivan

The writer is reporter, covering the changes to the federal work force

A federal judge on Friday called for a two-week pause in the Trump administration’s plans for mass layoffs and programme closures, barring two dozen agencies from moving forward with the largest phase of the president’s downsizing efforts, which the judge said was illegal without congressional authorisation. Of all the lawsuits challenging President Donald Trump’s vision to dramatically scale back the form and function of the federal government, this one is poised to have the broadest effect. Most of the agencies have yet to announce their downsizing plans, but employees across the government have been anxiously waiting for announcements that have been expected for weeks.

Ruling just hours after an emergency hearing on Friday, Judge Susan Illston of the US District Court for the Northern District of California said the government’s effort to lay off workers and shut down offices and programmes created an urgent threat to scores of critical services. Congress set up a specific process for the federal government to reorganise itself. The unions and organisations behind the lawsuit have argued that the president does not have the authority to make those decisions without the legislative branch.

Illston noted that process requires consultation with Congress on any plan to abolish or transfer part of an agency. “It is the prerogative of presidents to pursue new policy priorities and to imprint their stamp on the federal government,” she wrote in a 42-page order. “But to make large-scale overhauls of federal agencies, any president must enlist the help of his coequal branch and partner, the Congress.” Illston listed services that could disappear if the offices that administer them were wiped out, including disaster relief funds for farmers after a flood, in-person appointments for Social Security recipients to discuss their benefits, workplace safety inspections in mines and grants that support kindergarten programmes.

The scenario evoked what already happened at the Department of Health and Human Services — when mass layoffs caused major disruptions to programmes — but on a larger scale. The deep cuts there indirectly hampered programmes such as one that helps low-income families afford heating bills, and another that helps states track rates of chronic disease and gun violence.

Although unions and other organisations have sued the federal government over other personnel actions, including indiscriminately firing thousands of probationary workers earlier this year, this is the first time such a broad coalition came together to challenge the administration’s actions. The plaintiffs in the ambitious lawsuit included labor unions, nonprofits and six cities and counties — including Baltimore, Chicago, San Francisco and Harris County, Texas, home to Houston.

“The Trump administration’s unlawful attempt to reorganise the federal government has thrown agencies into chaos, disrupting critical services provided across our nation,” the coalition said in a joint statement. “Each of us represents communities deeply invested in the efficiency of the federal government — laying off federal employees and reorganising government functions haphazardly does not achieve that.”

The lawsuit, filed last week, is the latest in a progression of challenges that have all focused on the erosion of the federal civil service since Trump took office. It chronicled a steady effort to gut agencies in recent months, which it said has harmed not only tens of thousands of federal workers and their families, but the residents of the cities and counties involved, as critical health services, veterans benefits, environmental protections and disaster-relief assistance have lapsed or been thrown into doubt.

At particular issue are the looming “reductions in force,” which represent the biggest piece of Trump’s government downsizing efforts. Earlier this year, his administration fired thousands of probationary employees. But the current phase is expected to cut hundreds of thousands.

Agencies were given guidance and a brief timeline to complete plans for this reorganisation earlier this year. The government has done reorganisations this way before, but never on such a huge scale and on such a short timeline. To supplement the lawsuit, lawyers filed about 1,300 pages of sworn statements from local health providers, housing inspectors, law enforcement and firefighters, and others documenting the ways cuts to federal government have impacted their life and work.

During Friday’s hearing, Eric Hamilton, an attorney from the Justice Department, contended that the coalition of groups behind the lawsuit was legally problematic, because the unionised workers facing layoffs and the nonprofits and local governments bearing the brunt of federal services being cut were in separate “categories,” with obviously distinct harms.