A federal judge in California has issued a temporary block on the Trump administration's plans for reductions-in-force (RIF) and reorganization efforts across 21 federal departments and agencies. This significant ruling represents a setback for the administration's ongoing efforts to downsize the federal government.
In her order, Judge Susan Illston emphasized that while the President does hold the authority to seek changes to executive branch agencies, such actions must be conducted lawfully. Specifically, she noted that large-scale reorganizations require cooperation from the legislative branch. “Many presidents have sought this cooperation before; many iterations of Congress have provided it,” she stated. The judge further pointed out that nothing stops the President from requesting this cooperation, as seen during his prior term in office. She concluded that the President likely must seek Congressional support to implement the changes he desires, thereby issuing a temporary restraining order to halt the planned reductions in force for the time being.
This temporary restraining order, which will remain in effect for two weeks, effectively pauses the President's Department of Government Efficiency Workforce Optimization Initiative across 21 federal departments and agencies. This includes critical entities such as the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget, as well as the Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Interior, and Transportation. The ruling means that these agencies cannot proceed with the proposed RIF or reorganization initiatives.
Judge Illston, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton, expressed her belief that there is no statute granting the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), or the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) the authority to mandate large-scale terminations or restructuring of federal agencies. “Such action is far outside the bounds of any authority that Congress vested in OPM or OMB, and, as noted, DOGE has no statutory authority whatsoever,” she wrote, underscoring the legal limitations of these agencies.
Since President Trump took office in January, thousands of federal employees have been affected by reductions-in-force, although the administration has not provided an exact number of those impacted. The lawsuit challenging these actions was filed on April 28, and the Trump administration contended that the lawsuit was untimely, as the Executive Order related to the RIF was issued nearly three months prior. In other similar cases across the country, the administration has argued that lawsuits filed immediately following Executive Orders are premature.
In response to the judge's ruling, a coalition of non-profits, unions, and local governments released a statement expressing their concerns. They argued that the Trump administration's “unlawful attempt to reorganize the federal government has thrown agencies into chaos, disrupting critical services provided across our nation.” The coalition emphasized that each member represents communities that rely heavily on the efficiency of the federal government, stating, “Laying off federal employees and reorganizing government functions haphazardly does not achieve that. We are gratified by the court’s decision today to pause these harmful actions while our case proceeds.”
Judge Illston is scheduled to hear further arguments in this case on May 22. As the situation develops, the White House has yet to respond to requests for comments regarding this ruling and its implications for federal workforce management.
