Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration's Workforce Cuts: Legal Battle Over Constitutional Authority

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston issued a temporary restraining order on May 9, 2025, halting the Trump administration's efforts to downsize the federal workforce. The order pauses a February executive order that led to job losses across over 20 federal agencies. The decision follows a lawsuit by labor unions, nonprofit organizations, and cities like San Francisco, arguing the administration bypassed Congress and disrupted services. The restraining order affects departments including Agriculture, Energy, and Veterans Affairs, and blocks further directives from the Department of Government Efficiency and the Office of Personnel Management.

Legal Challenge to Executive Authority

The lawsuit, filed in late April, challenges the legality of President Donald Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to prepare for large-scale reductions in force (RIFs) and organizational restructuring. The plaintiffs—led by the American Federation of Government Employees, the cities of San Francisco, Chicago, and Baltimore, and several nonprofit groups—argue that the administration’s actions violate the Constitution by bypassing Congress, which created the affected agencies and holds the power to reorganize them.

Judge Illston agreed with the plaintiffs’ core argument, writing in her order that “the President likely must request Congressional cooperation to order the changes he seeks.” She emphasized that while the president has broad authority to manage the executive branch, that power is not unlimited and must be exercised within the bounds of existing law and constitutional structure.

Scope of the Restraining Order

The temporary restraining order, which is set to expire in 14 days unless extended, blocks 21 federal departments and agencies from continuing layoffs, administrative leave placements, or program eliminations tied to the February executive order. Affected entities include the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, Labor, Interior, State, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, as well as the Social Security Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Science Foundation.

The order also halts further directives from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—a Trump-created office led by Elon Musk—and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which had issued memos instructing agencies to implement the president’s downsizing initiative.

Background: A Sweeping Reorganization Effort

Since returning to office in January 2025, President Trump has pursued an aggressive campaign to reduce the size of the federal government, which he has repeatedly described as bloated and inefficient. The February executive order called for “large-scale reductions in force” and directed agencies to submit reorganization plans aimed at cutting costs and consolidating functions.

The administration has already laid off thousands of federal employees, particularly targeting probationary workers who lack full civil service protections. According to court filings, at least 75,000 federal employees have taken deferred resignations, and thousands more have been terminated or placed on leave. The Department of Health and Human Services alone announced plans in March to lay off 10,000 workers and centralize operations.

Judicial Reasoning and Evidence

In her ruling, Judge Illston noted that the plaintiffs presented credible evidence that agencies were acting on direct orders from the White House and DOGE, rather than treating the executive order and memos as general guidance. “They are not waiting for these planning documents to go through long processes,” she said during the hearing. “They’re not asking for approval, and they’re not waiting for it.”

Illston also pointed out that all the affected agencies were created by Congress, and any significant restructuring or elimination of these entities would require legislative action. She cited past precedent, including Trump’s own efforts in 2017, when he sought congressional cooperation for similar reorganization plans.

The judge further criticized the administration for leaving the Merit Systems Protection Board—the body responsible for adjudicating federal employment disputes—without a quorum, effectively denying federal workers a venue to challenge their dismissals.

Government’s Defense and Pushback

Attorneys for the Trump administration argued that the executive order and accompanying memos merely provided broad policy guidance and did not mandate specific personnel actions. They contended that federal agencies have long had the authority to conduct RIFs and that the administration’s actions were consistent with nearly 150 years of precedent.

The government also challenged the timing of the lawsuit, claiming that the plaintiffs waited too long to file and that the court lacked jurisdiction. Judge Illston rejected these arguments, stating that the plaintiffs acted reasonably in gathering evidence of harm before seeking judicial relief.

Impact on Federal Services

The plaintiffs highlighted several examples of how the downsizing has already affected public services. One union representing federal researchers reported that 221 of 222 employees at a Pittsburgh office studying mineworker health hazards were slated for termination. In Vermont, a farmer missed a critical planting window after a delayed disaster aid inspection. The Social Security Administration has seen increased wait times due to staffing reductions.

“These are not abstract harms,” said Danielle Leonard, an attorney for the plaintiffs. “These are real consequences for real people.”

Broader Legal Context

This case is one of several legal challenges to the Trump administration’s federal workforce policies. In a separate lawsuit earlier this year, Judge William Alsup ordered the government to reinstate thousands of probationary workers who had been terminated. However, the U.S. Supreme Court later stayed that ruling while litigation continues.

Judge Illston is scheduled to hear further arguments in the current case on May 22. While the temporary restraining order does not require agencies to rehire laid-off employees, it does prevent any new RIF notifications or implementation of existing ones during the two-week period.

References

• Trump administration must halt some DOGE cuts at 20 federal agencies, judge rules
• Judge temporarily blocks Trump administration from laying off federal employees
• Judge pauses much of Trump administration's massive downsizing of federal agencies
• Federal judge temporarily halts Trump's sweeping government overhaul
• Judge pauses Trump's effort to reduce the size of the federal government
• Judge pauses much of Trump administration's massive downsizing of federal agencies
• Judge pauses much of Trump administration's massive downsizing of federal agencies