Supreme Court greenlights layoffs: What it means for federal employees
The apparent 8-1 emergency decision lifts the widest block on Trump's plans for massive reductions in force (RIFs). But a patchwork of injunctions that have yet to reach the justices remain in place, creating a jumbled situation that keeps reductions at specific agencies on ice.
While many legal battles remain ongoing and more are sure to come, the Tuesday ruling allows the Trump administration to kick off layoffs at 17 agencies that have all been directed to conduct widespread cuts.
Here's what to know.
The Trump administration was already on the cusp of laying off thousands of federal workers when the courts intervened, blocking the plan amid litigation.
But the Supreme Court's decision now paves the way for the executive branch to resume implementing Trump's Feb. 11 executive order, which directs agencies to undertake the RIFs.
The justices lifted a district judge's May injunction that prevented 22 agencies from carrying out the directive. That ruling meant the agencies couldn't conduct layoffs or continue planning for them.
Three of those entities — the Department of Government Efficiency, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) — aid the others in implementing the initiative. The judge described their role as Trump's 'centralized decisionmakers.'
Among the remaining 19, judges in separate lawsuits have blocked the RIFs at both the Department of Health and Human Services and AmeriCorps. Those injunctions remain in effect.
That leaves 17 agencies newly freed to proceed in the wake of Tuesday's ruling.
The list includes the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, State, Treasury, Transportation, and Veterans Affairs.
The Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Labor Relations Board, National Science Foundation, Peace Corps, Small Business Administration and Social Security Agency are also part of the group of 17 agencies that can now begin layoffs.
The injunction had only left four of the nation's 15 executive departments untouched: the departments of Defense, Education, Homeland Security and Justice. Separate litigation has halted the Education layoffs, however.
Trump's February executive order had directed agencies to pull together their RIF lists and agency redesign plans by April 14, so departments that complied were awaiting approval from the OMB when the court enjoined the process.
Now, agencies are largely prepared to actually carry out the RIFs they were planning on and can likely quickly pivot to do so.
A joint memo from the OPM and the OMB directed agencies to seek a waiver to shorten the notification window for employees, so employees could be given as little as 30 days notice that they will lose their jobs, rather than the traditional 60 days.
The justices went out of their way to make clear they haven't yet resolved whether any specific agency's reorganization plan is legal.
The Trump administration also still has numerous aspects it must comply with in carrying out the RIFs, including details surrounding how it selects those being laying off and in some cases notifying Congress and unions.
Those agency-by-agency plans could ultimately reach the justices.
While only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson publicly dissented Tuesday, one of her fellow Democratic-appointed justices expressed an openness to joining her down the road.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor in a one-paragraph solo opinion said she agreed with Jackson that Trump cannot 'restructure federal agencies in a manner inconsistent with congressional mandates.'
'The plans themselves are not before this Court, at this stage, and we thus have no occasion to consider whether they can and will be carried out consistent with the constraints of law,' Sotomayor cautioned.
Some layoffs remain on hold as a result of other lawsuits.
That includes injunctions still on the books for two of the agencies implicated in Tuesday's Supreme Court ruling.
Democratic-led states persuaded U.S. District Judge Melissa DuBose to block a reduction impacting nearly 10,000 Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) workers. DuBose is an appointee of former President Biden.
HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had announced the layoffs March 27 as part of a massive restructuring effort.
At AmeriCorps, U.S. District Judge Matthew Maddox ordered the administration to reinstate employees it eliminated or put on leave in an April RIF. Maddox, another Biden appointee, also blocked officials from conducting any new reductions that affects unionized employees.
Both blocks remain in full force. A handful of judges have also halted agency-specific RIFs rooted in other policy justifications, like Trump's campaign promise to eliminate the Education Department.
Democratic-led states, school districts and unions convinced U.S. District Judge Myong Joun, a Biden appointee who serves in Boston, to indefinitely block a March RIF covering 1,400 workers, roughly half the department's staff.
The administration filed an emergency bid at the Supreme Court to lift the block, and the justices could rule at any time.
And beyond RIFs, courts have also still blocked the firing of probationary employees — those still within their first year or two of service — if they used the OPM template to carry out the wide-ranging firings.
Other cases remain in the lower courts.
In response to another union lawsuit, a federal appeals court blocked a reduction at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that would impact 90 percent of employees. That block remains in effect until the appeals panel resolves the case.
Federal judges have also reversed mass terminations at the U.S. African Development Foundation and Inter-American Foundation, which help promote democracy and development efforts in Africa and Latin America.
The judges found Trump unlawfully installed Pete Marocco to lead the groups, so all of his actions are void. Marocco's appointments came after Trump signed an executive order on Feb. 19 calling for the two agencies to be eliminated to the maximum extent possible.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
15 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Trump says he's considering ‘taking away' Rosie O'Donnell's US citizenship
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump says he is considering 'taking away' the U.S. citizenship of a longtime rival, actress and comedian Rosie O'Donnell, despite a decades-old Supreme Court ruling that expressly prohibits such an action by the government. 'Because of the fact that Rosie O'Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship,' Trump wrote in a social media post on Saturday. He added that O'Donnell, who moved to Ireland in January, should stay in Ireland 'if they want her.' The two have criticized each other publicly for years, an often bitter back-and-forth that predates Trump's involvement in politics. In recent days, O'Donnell on social media denounced Trump and recent moves by his administration, including the signing of a massive GOP-backed tax breaks and spending cuts plan. It's just the latest threat by Trump to revoke the citizenship of people with whom he has publicly disagreed, most recently his former adviser and one-time ally, Elon Musk . But O'Donnell's situation is notably different from Musk, who was born in South Africa. O'Donnell was born in the United States and has a constitutional right to U.S. citizenship. The U.S. State Department notes on its website that U.S. citizens by birth or naturalization may relinquish U.S. nationality by taking certain steps – but only if the act is performed voluntary and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship. Amanda Frost, a law professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, noted the Supreme Court ruled in a 1967 case that the Fourteen Amendment of the Constitution prevents the government from taking away citizenship. 'The president has no authority to take away the citizenship of a native-born U.S. citizen,' Frost said in an email Saturday. 'In short, we are nation founded on the principle that the people choose the government; the government cannot choose the people.' O'Donnell moved to Ireland after Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris to win his second term. She has said she's in the process of obtaining Irish citizenship based on family lineage. Responding to Trump Saturday, O'Donnell wrote on social media that she had upset the president and 'add me to the list of people who oppose him at every turn.'
Business Insider
34 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Trump says he wants to send Patriot batteries to Ukraine. One country might be down to pay for them.
President Donald Trump said on Sunday that he plans to send Patriot batteries to Ukraine, though this time with Europe paying for the air defenses. "We basically are going to send them various pieces of very sophisticated military equipment," he told reporters at Joint Base Andrews. "They are going to pay us 100% for that, and that's the way we want it." Trump did not say on Sunday how many Patriot batteries he planned to send to Ukraine. But one NATO ally is likely already willing to foot the bill. For the past few weeks, German leaders were reported to be scouting ways to procure more air defenses for Ukraine, which has been pounded relentlessly by growing waves of Russian drones and missile strikes. Bloomberg reported, citing an unnamed government source, that German Chancellor Friedrich Merz called Trump about the matter as early as July 4. In the days since, Merz has publicly confirmed such discussions. "We are ready to acquire additional Patriot systems from the United States and make them available to Ukraine," he said Thursday at the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Rome. More recently, Germany's defense minister, Boris Pistorius, told The Financial Times that he would discuss with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth the possibility of Berlin buying two Patriot systems for Kyiv. "We only have six left in Germany," Pistorius told the outlet in an interview published on Sunday. "That's really too few, especially considering the NATO capability goals we have to meet. We definitely can't give any more." Germany is believed to have 12 Patriot systems, three of which it has given to Ukraine. It's stationed at least two more in Poland. The MIM-104 Patriot system, in service since the 1980s, is considered one of the world's most advanced surface-to-air missile defense systems. Analysts think Ukraine likely has six to eight batteries — far less than what it needs to shield its cities from Russia's nighttime strikes. Meanwhile, the US has procured over 1,100 Patriot launchers so far. Eight of these launchers can be deployed at a time on a single battery. Roughly 200 such launchers have been exported to other countries, while the US military actively runs 16 battalions of four batteries each. That could mean the Pentagon has about 400 launchers, or about 50 batteries, left in its stockpile or in maintenance. "The Americans need some of them themselves, but they also have a lot of them," Merz said on Thursday of the Patriot systems. Last year, his nation became the largest military spender in Western Europe for the first time since the Cold War, ramping up its defense budget by nearly 30% to $88.5 billion, per the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. The German Defense Ministry did not respond to a request for comment sent outside regular business hours by Business Insider. Trump's latest comments about the Patriot batteries come after he had paused American weapons and ammo aid to Ukraine at the start of the month, sparking concerns about the latter's ability to defend itself with air interceptors. But the president appeared to change his mind a week later, saying at a White House dinner event that he wanted to send more weapons to Kyiv. "They have to be able to defend themselves," Trump told reporters at the dinner.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Morning Bid: The art of hogging headlines, using tariffs
(Reuters) -A look at the day ahead in European and global markets from Wayne Cole. It looks increasingly clear that for President Trump, tariffs are mainly a convenient means of dominating the news cycle and staying in the headlines. Not for him are months of tortuous, complex trade talks aimed at a win-win outcome. Why do that when you can tweet a 30% tariff threat on a Saturday morning and own the news for an entire weekend? Figuring this is mostly a negotiation tactic, markets have eased only modestly in Asia. S&P 500 futures are off 0.4% or so while most regional indices are down only slightly. The euro is down a fraction, but European futures have lost a larger 0.7% as it's hard to see how Brussels could ever satisfy Trump's demands, in part because it's not clear what he wants. EU tariffs on U.S. goods are already so minor there is little to cut, while granting exemption to domestic taxes and regulations is politically fraught. It's also possible the market's stoic reaction will prove to be too clever by half. Investors figure Trump really, really wants to avoid another market melt-down, so will ease up on tariffs when the crunch comes. But with U.S. stocks hitting record highs and bond yields well off their peaks, Trump could be forgiven for thinking markets are now on his side and realise how "beautiful" tariffs really are. At any rate, it seems certain that the effective U.S. tariff rate will be akin to the Smoot-Hawley levies that contributed so much to the Great Depression and we'll get to see if Trump is right and the vast majority of professional economists are wrong. They don't yet look to have magically solved the U.S. trade deficit. China today reported its surplus with the U.S. rose 48% in June to almost $27 billion, while its overall exports beat forecasts. Trump also found time to stoke his feud with Fed Chair Jerome Powell, saying it would be "a great thing" if he stepped down - eight years after he nominated Powell to the role. Worryingly, White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett over the weekend warned Trump might have grounds to fire Powell because of renovation cost overruns at the Fed's Washington headquarters. Analysts assume a Trump pick for Fed chief would do his bidding by trying to cut interest rates aggressively, though whether the rest of FOMC voters would agree is in doubt. This could push short-term market rates lower, but longer-term yields would likely rise as investors demand compensation for the risk of faster inflation, much as happened in Turkey. Key developments that could influence markets on Monday: - ECB board member Piero Cipollone appears at the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of the European Parliament (By Wayne Cole; Editing by Christopher Cushing)
