US: Trump administration requests Supreme Court to allow layoffs of federal workers

ANI May 17, 2025 309 views

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to allow mass layoffs of federal workers after a lower court blocked the move. Solicitor General John Sauer argues the freeze disrupts workforce restructuring efforts. Judge Susan Illston ruled the administration failed to follow legal layoff procedures. Unions, nonprofits, and Democratic-led states oppose the layoffs, calling them unlawful.

"The order has brought to a halt numerous in-progress RIFs at more than a dozen federal agencies." – Solicitor General John Sauer
Washington, DC, May 17: The Trump administration on Friday requested the Supreme Court permit it to proceed immediately with its plan to lay off tens of thousands of workers across federal agencies, Politico reported.

Key Points

1

Trump administration appeals to Supreme Court to lift layoff freeze

2

Lower court blocked mass firings citing legal violations

3

Over 20 Democratic states back federal workers

4

Largest unions and nonprofits challenge Trump’s executive order

In an emergency appeal, the administration requested the judges to lift a lower court order temporarily preventing the layoffs quickly. Trump's administration's request for Supreme Court intervention is the latest step in its mission to reduce the federal workforce. The high court has assisted the administration in its mission previously.

Earlier in April, the judges lifted a lower-court order that had halted the mass firings of probationary workers at six Cabinet departments.

The Trump administration's new appeal concerns a broader group of federal employees that several agencies want to terminate under an executive order issued in February calling for "large-scale reductions in force."

Last week, US District Judge Susan Illston, a Clinton appointee, stopped the administration from carrying out the layoffs, Politico reported.

In his Supreme Court appeal, Solicitor General John Sauer said that Illston improperly encroached on the president's "unquestioned legal authority to plan and carry out" layoffs and reorganise the federal workforce.

Sauer wrote, "The order has brought to a halt numerous in-progress RIFs at more than a dozen federal agencies, compelling the government to retain, at taxpayer expense, thousands of employees whose continuance in federal service is determined by agencies not to be in the government and public interest."

Sauer said Illston's order has blocked about 40 ongoing reductions-in-force at 17 agencies. The largest federal workers' unions in the country, along with several nonprofits and local governments, have challenged Trump's order. Over 20 Democratic-leaning states have filed briefs in support of the workers.

Illston said that the administration is not following strict legal and procedural requirements that apply when the government wants to carry out mass layoffs, including how long an employee has been with an agency.

She further said that a president needs "the cooperation of the legislative branch" when making the kind of large-scale reorganisations that Trump has announced. She recalled that Trump urged Congress to pass a bill to back similar efforts during his first presidency, Politico reported.

Illston's order covered 21 agencies, including, Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE); the departments of Energy, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Interior, Labor, State, Treasury, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the National Labor Relations Board, National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration, Social Security Administration and AmeriCorps.

Reader Comments

R
Rahul K.
This seems like a very American problem, but it's interesting to see how their government functions. In India, we've seen similar debates about bureaucracy size. Maybe some reforms are needed, but mass layoffs seem harsh. Hope the Supreme Court considers workers' livelihoods. 🇮🇳
P
Priya M.
Trump's approach is too aggressive! In India, we understand the need for government efficiency, but sudden job cuts can destabilize families. Our own government makes reforms gradually. American workers deserve better protection. #WorkersRights
A
Amit S.
Interesting to compare with our system. In India, government jobs are prized for stability. American model seems more flexible but also more uncertain. Maybe a middle path would be best? 🤔
N
Neha P.
Judge Illston makes a good point about needing legislative cooperation. In our democracy too, major changes require consensus. Trump's unilateral approach seems problematic. Hope SC considers this carefully!
V
Vikram J.
As someone who worked in both countries, I can say Indian bureaucracy needs reforms too. But American system has its own flaws - this sudden layoff plan shows lack of planning. Reforms should be systematic, not impulsive.
S
Sanjay R.
The mention of Veterans Affairs in the affected agencies is concerning. In India, we respect our armed forces personnel. Hope American veterans don't suffer due to these cuts. Jai Hind!

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Your email won't be published


Disclaimer: Comments here reflect the author's views alone. Insulting or using offensive language against individuals, communities, religion, or the nation is illegal.

Tags: