Supreme Court Lets Trump Resume Mass Federal Layoffs
On Tuesday, the court lifted an order from a lower court blocking the enforcement of a February executive order in which President Donald Trump laid out plans for large scale firings and layoffs across the government. The court ruled 7-2 to lift the order, with liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor joining conservatives in siding with the administration
In her concurrence with the majority, Sotomayor wrote that while 'the President cannot restructure federal agencies in a manner inconsistent with congressional mandates,' the 'relevant Executive Order directs agencies to plan reorganizations and reductions in force 'consistent with applicable law.'' Since the legality of the specific plans and methods were not directly before the court, the executive order was, in her view, within the powers of the president.
Fellow liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in a scathing dissent that the order — and plans outlined by the Trump administration — potentially usurped powers vested in Congress. The lower court had stayed the layoffs in order while it litigated the legal merits of the case, but, as Jackson wrote, 'that temporary, practical, harm-reducing preservation of the status quo was no match for this Court's demonstrated enthusiasm for greenlighting this President's legally dubious actions in an emergency posture.'
'This Court lacks the capacity to fully evaluate, much less responsibly override, reasoned lower court fact finding about what this challenged executive action actually entails,' Jackson added.
The decision is a victory for the Trump administration, whose efforts to gut the federal workforce and dismantle entire agencies has repeatedly been stymied by legal challenges and court rulings. When U.S. District Judge Susan Illston issued the preliminary injunction against Trump's February executive order, she stopped removals at over 20 agencies.
The Trump administration has gambled that it can litigate many of its more extreme, constitutionally dubious initiatives through the courts and come out on top. Once again, the Supreme Court has proven him correct.
More from Rolling Stone
Trump Voter Andrew Schulz Can't Believe Trump Isn't Doing What He Campaigned On
The DOJ's Epstein Memo Is Tearing the Trump Administration Apart
Blue States Invest Retirees' Savings in Firms Boosting Trump's Extreme Agenda
Best of Rolling Stone
The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign
Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal
The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Western aid cuts cede ground to China in Southeast Asia: study
China is set to expand its influence over Southeast Asia's development as the Trump administration and other Western donors slash aid, a study by an Australian think tank said Sunday. The region is in an "uncertain moment", facing cuts in official development finance from the West as well as "especially punitive" US trade tariffs, the Sydney-based Lowy Institute said. "Declining Western aid risks ceding a greater role to China, though other Asian donors will also gain in importance," it said. Total official development finance to Southeast Asia -- including grants, low-rate loans and other loans -- grew "modestly" to US$29 billion in 2023, the annual report said. But US President Donald Trump has since halted about US$60 billion in development assistance -- most of the United States' overseas aid programme. Seven European countries -- including France and Germany -- and the European Union have announced US$17.2 billion in aid cuts to be implemented between 2025 and 2029, it said. And the United Kingdom has said it is reducing annual aid by US$7.6 billion, redirecting government money towards defence. Based on recent announcements, overall official development finance to Southeast Asia will fall by more than US$2 billion by 2026, the study projected. "These cuts will hit Southeast Asia hard," it said. "Poorer countries and social sector priorities such as health, education, and civil society support that rely on bilateral aid funding are likely to lose out the most." Higher-income countries already capture most of the region's official development finance, said the institute's Southeast Asia Aid Map report. Poorer countries such as East Timor, Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar are being left behind, creating a deepening divide that could undermine long-term stability, equity and resilience, it warned. Despite substantial economic development across most of Southeast Asia, around 86 million people still live on less than US$3.65 a day, it said. - 'Global concern' - "The centre of gravity in Southeast Asia's development finance landscape looks set to drift East, notably to Beijing but also Tokyo and Seoul," the study said. As trade ties with the United States have weakened, Southeast Asian countries' development options could shrink, it said, leaving them with less leverage to negotiate favourable terms with Beijing. "China's relative importance as a development actor in the region will rise as Western development support recedes," it said. Beijing's development finance to the region rose by US$1.6 billion to US$4.9 billion in 2023 -- mostly through big infrastructure projects such as rail links in Indonesia and Malaysia, the report said. At the same time, China's infrastructure commitments to Southeast Asia surged fourfold to almost US$10 billion, largely due to the revival of the Kyaukphyu Deep Sea Port project in Myanmar. By contrast, Western alternative infrastructure projects had failed to materialise in recent years, the study said. "Similarly, Western promises to support the region's clean energy transition have yet to translate into more projects on the ground -- of global concern given coal-dependent Southeast Asia is a major source of rapidly growing carbon emissions." djw/dgi/dhw/rsc Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
New York Post
20 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump's party-splitting Epstein dilemma: Letters to the Editor — July 21, 2025
The Issue: President Trump's response to criticism of the Justice Department's Jeffrey Epstein findings. Take a breath, and consider these facts: The Biden administration had access to whatever Jeffrey Epstein documents existed for the entire time that it was in office (''Epstein hoax' not welcome in MAGA,' July 17). Don't you think that the team that invented 'lawfare' would have exposed anything reflecting negatively on President Trump or any Republicans? Epstein had a successful, high-level career in finance before anyone was aware of his sick perversion. He interacted with many well-known and well-heeled individuals in legitimate interactions. Given these facts, how could you release any names in Epstein's notes without context? If you met him with a group of people at a function, and he made a note of it, you'd be smeared by association. Thomas Smith Sarasota, Fla. Although I'm a lifelong Republican, I'm switching my voter registration, and I'll be supporting Democrats in the midterms; we all should. There's no excuse for not prosecuting pedophiles in the Epstein case, and there's even less excuse for attacking one's own supporters for thinking so. Harry Knopp Ripley, WV I honestly believe there is a major coverup. A high-profile inmate conveniently committed suicide and how convenient that all of a sudden there is no list. Prince Andrew was caught and booted out. Clinton was on the plane with Jeffrey Epstein several times and his prior actions speak volumes. Why don't they ask his partner, Ghislaine Maxwell? You're trying to say she doesn't know anything about who else was involved? I am just surprised Maxwell hasn't committed suicide while in jail. She has to have knowledge of this. Bring her before the Department of Justice. Robert Caprio Nutley, NJ The current controversy about releasing the Epstein files fails to consider the difficult choices related to First Amendment protections. While transparency is the current catchword, there are many instances where the public's right to know is secondary to a person's right to privacy and freedom from governmental interference. I want to assure your readers that I have many doubts about Epstein's death, and great curiosity about the alleged client list. But, at the same time, the fact that someone traveled with Epstein or stayed at his resort is not, in itself, a criminal act. On balance, I opt for not releasing any alleged list that may be in the possession of the DOJ. Sidney Baumgarten North Brunswick, NJ Usually, the easiest way to stop a rumor is to provide the public with access to the available information, unless there are issues with the information or names in it that could bias an audience or suggest guilt. Unfortunately, our president believes that the only truth is what he tells us, not what is factual. Alan Swartz Verona, NJ I bleed MAGA red, so I'm not sure who Miranda Devine is referring to when she writes that Trump's base wants the truth about Epstein ('MAGA base wants truth on Epstein,' July 17). I couldn't care less. Sure, I feel terrible for Epstein's victims and there are plenty of sick, depraved individuals out there who need to be arrested and thrown in jail. But Republicans have far greater things to worry about than a dead creep who hung out with Bill Clinton. If the Epstein scandal was so important to the Dems, why weren't they more transparent when they had the chance? Republicans need to stick together, support Trump and make sure as few Democrats as possible get elected to prevent them from wrecking our country. That's what the president's base wants. Michael D'Auria Bronxville The extremely wealthy have had privileges from the beginning of time. Kings, past presidents and dictators have mistresses without censure or open complaint; yet when a group of wealthy people cavort within their group it becomes a cause célèbre. Paul Alexander Ontario, Canada Want to weigh in on today's stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@ Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.
Bloomberg
23 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Brazil Weighs Measures on US Dividends, Tech Firms, Reports Say
By Brazil's government is studying potential responses to further sanctions by US President Donald Trump, including a limit on dividend payments by US companies with operations in Brazil, according to O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper. President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's government is intensifying its deliberations on possible measures after the US government announced it was revoking visas for some Brazilian Supreme Court justices. The move came after Justice Alexandre de Moraes sent police to raid the home of ex-President Jair Bolsonaro ahead of his trial on charges he attempted a coup to remain in power.
