WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court has maintained a legal halt on President Trump’s widespread dismissals from several agencies, marking another legal hindrance for the Republican administration in its efforts to transform the executive branch.
The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, issued a 2-1 decision on Friday refusing to allow the Trump administration to continue with its cuts in personnel. This ruling follows an earlier pause imposed by a federal judge this month on its reduction in force (RIF) initiatives led by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
The central issue was Trump’s executive order dated February 13, which called for “large-scale reductions in force” across federal agencies. This order prompted numerous unions, non-profits, and local governments to file a lawsuit.
“The Executive Order at issue here far exceeds the President’s supervisory powers under the Constitution,” wrote Circuit Judge William Fletcher, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton.
“The President enjoys significant removal power with respect to the appointed officers of federal agencies,” he added. “But even that power is not unlimited.”
The majority opinion, joined by Biden-appointed Circuit Judge Lucy Koh, also noted “cuts of up to 50%” of Department of Energy staff, the elimination of AmeriCorps volunteer youth programs and the layoffs of thousands of other probationary employees in the government.
Circuit Judge Consuelo Maria Callahan in a dissenting opinion charged that the plaintiffs were “bypassing the comprehensive administrative scheme that Congress has enacted to handle federal sector labor and employment disputes.”
“The district court nevertheless entertained Plaintiffs’ claims and concluded that the Executive’s actions likely violate separation of powers — without making any finding that any agency’s RIF is likely to violate any statute,” wrote Callahan, an appointee of former President George W. Bush.
“The court then entered a sweeping preliminary injunction that strips the Executive of control over its own personnel,” she disputed the lower court ruling, noting the Trump administration was likely to succeed in the case.
The Trump administration had previously asked the US Supreme Court to intervene and allow the federal workforce restructuring initiated by the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget — but the high court has yet to take up the case.
US District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco granted a temporary restraining order on the restructuring for 14 days, ruling May 9 that Trump officials had made the move without congressional authorization.
“The Court here is not considering the potential loss of income of one individual employee, but the widespread termination of salaries and benefits for individuals, families, and communities,” Illston wrote.
On May 22, the California judge extended that to a preliminary injunction, initiating the appeal to the federal circuit court.
“A single judge is attempting to unconstitutionally seize the power of hiring and firing from the Executive Branch,” White House spokesman Harrison Fields fired back in a statement.
“The President has the authority to exercise the power of the entire executive branch — singular district court judges cannot abuse the power of the entire judiciary to thwart the President’s agenda.”
A second appeal to the Supreme Court has yet to be filed.
