Trump turns to high court after appeals panel continues hold on further mass layoffs

The Donald Trump administration this week asked the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and prevent lower courts from holding up White House efforts to downsize and reorganize much of the federal government.

“This court recently intervened to stop a district court from undoing the effects of the lawful large-scale termination of probationary government employees.” the Justice Department said in its filing this week. “It should take the same course here, where the injunction sweeps far more broadly— to cover most of the federal government—and even restricts the executive in planning personnel actions.”

The administration asked the Supreme Court for an immediate administrative stay preventing an injunction that was put in place by a federal district court in Northern California and upheld last week by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. 

The White House filing was reported earlier this week by various media, including CNN and Courthouse News Service. 

In a split decision, a federal appeals court panel Friday May 30 kept in place a lower court’s order temporarily blocking the White House from carrying out more mass layoffs at the Departments of Defense, Energy, Interior and many other agencies.

In a 2-to-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit kept in place a preliminary injunction by U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, which held the administration of President Donald Trump lacks authority to undertake a widespread government reorganization without congressional involvement.

“Acting as the motions panel of our court, we deny defendants’ emergency motion for a stay of the district court’s preliminary injunction,” according to last week’s ruling.

“It has now been over a month since plaintiffs first filed their complaint,” the panel goes on to say. The case was brought by plaintiffs such as the American Federation of Government Employees, non-profit groups and municipal governments. “Defendants have yet to show the district court—or us—a single piece of evidence in support of its allegation of irreparable injury resulting from the district court’s TRO [temporary restraining order] or preliminary injunction.”

As a result, there is no evidence that the administration will suffer “irreparable” harm by putting mass firings and agency re-organization plans on hold pending further review, the appeals court said. The panel agreed with the federal district judge’s earlier finding that the administration won’t suffer significant harm if the status quo is preserved at least temporarily.

The appeals court also said Trump’s 2025 executive order is far different than the executive order President Bill Clinton used to pare down government payrolls in the 1990s.

That order required a 4% reduction in federal jobs over three years largely through attrition or buyout programs overseen by agency heads, the court said. “Even setting aside the difference in scale” the court said, Congress “expressly authorized” voluntary separation incentive payments.

“At the Department of Energy, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has proposed cuts of up to 50% to the agency’s workforce, including cuts of 54% to science and innovation programs and 61% to energy infrastructure and deployment,” according to the majority opinion.

Circuit Court Judge Consuelo Callahan dissented from the panel major. Judge Callahan said the president has authority over the executive branch and orders on federal layoffs and agency reorganization were issued under applicable law.