Updated: May 19 at 11:29 a.m. ET
The Trump administration filed an emergency appeal Friday for permission to continue reducing federal agencies by thousands of workers.
Close observers of lawsuits involving the federal workforce and Trump may remember a similar request to the Supreme Court, asking the nation's highest legal authority to lift an order blocking mass firings of probationary employees at six agencies. A similar outcome occurred at the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding a separate, broader lawsuit on probationary worker firings.
The newest appeal (PDF) to the Supreme Court applies toward the next round of worker reductions at agencies, this time impacting about 10,000 workers at the Department of Health and Human Services. A collection of labor unions, nonprofits and city governments previously secured a two-week pause on the Trump administration's large-scale reorganization of several federal departments, including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Now, the government argues the lower court decision granted "universal relief that far exceeds anything necessary."
"That far-reaching order bars almost the entire executive branch from formulating and implementing plans to reduce the size of the federal workforce, and requires disclosure of sensitive and deliberative agency documents that are presumptively protected by executive privilege—and it does all of that based on the extraordinary view that the president lacks authority to direct executive agencies how to exercise their statutory powers to conduct large-scale personnel actions within the executive branch," the administration's lawyers said, noting President Bill Clinton was also able to carry out large reductions in force.
The temporary restraining order by the lower court, granted on the evening of May 9, does not require the government to rehire any workers who have already been terminated, but reflects U.S. District Judge Susan Illston's view that the plaintiffs "are likely to succeed on the merits of at least some of their claims" that the widespread firings are unlawful and that plaintiffs would face irreparable harm absent the injunction.
"The President has the authority to seek changes to executive branch agencies, but he must do so in lawful ways and, in the case of large-scale reorganizations, with the cooperation of the legislative branch," Illston wrote in the order granting the pause. "Many presidents have sought this cooperation before; many iterations of Congress have provided it. Nothing prevents the President from requesting this cooperation—as he did in his prior term of office."
The judge wrote that the large-scale restructuring and mass terminations are "far outside the bounds of any authority that Congress vested" in the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management, while noting that the Department of Government Efficiency "has no statutory authority whatsoever."
Also highlighted in the lower court order among the over 1,000 pages of evidence submitted by plaintiffs were 221 cuts to the 222-person National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health's Pittsburgh office, and the closure of the HHS Head Start program's San Francisco office layoff that has since forced a county government to send its own layoff notices to more than 100 early learning program workers.
The administration filed an appeal of the temporary restraining order the same night. Both sides are required to submit additional filings arguing for or against a broader preliminary injunction this week—though the administration has since asked the court to reconsider its requirement to disclose its Agency Reduction in Force and Reorganization Plans, which is said contains "significant, highly sensitive information."
Plaintiffs in the case include the American Public Health Association, the American Federation of Government Employees, the Service Employees International Union, the Main Street Alliance, the city of Baltimore, the city of Chicago and the city and county of San Francisco.
They claimed recent actions undertaken by departments like the HHS to fulfill a February executive order to mass terminate government employees unlawfully bypasses Congress, exceeds presidential authority and violates separation of powers under the Constitution.
“The president does not possess authority to reorganize, downsize or otherwise transform the agencies of the federal government, unless and until Congress authorizes such action,” the union-led lawsuit (PDF) filed in late April reads.
Additionally, a coalition of 20 state attorneys general plaintiffs have asked the court to provide injunctive relief and to reinstate critical programs in their own separate lawsuit.
The attorney-general-led complaint (PDF) similarly argues actions surrounding the HHS reorganizations bypass Congress and violate federal law and the Constitution.
Programs affected by workforce reductions include a team maintaining the federal poverty guidelines, determining Medicaid eligibility and managing substance abuse and mental health services. The sudden changes will also impact tobacco prevention programs and the World Trade Center Health Program for first responders and survivors of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack as well as labs tracking infectious diseases.
“This administration is not streamlining the federal government; they are sabotaging it and all of us,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James in a statement. “When you fire the scientists who research infectious diseases, silence the doctors who care for pregnant patients, and shut down the programs that help firefighters and miners breathe or children thrive, you are not making America healthy-you are putting countless lives at risk.”
More cuts are on the way if a Trump-supported budget is approved, yet resources to the HHS have already been "deprived" in the wake of the mass reorganization, the lawsuit explains.
"There was no one to answer the phone, factories went into shutdown mode, experiments were abandoned, trainings were canceled, site visits were postponed, application portals were closed, laboratories stopped testing for infectious diseases such as hepatitis, and partnerships were immediately suspended," the plaintiffs wrote, recalling the initial days after the reduction in force at the HHS April 1.
At HHS, approximately 10,000 employee positions were eliminated. The department will undergo a reorganization that will see the agency eliminate whole offices, moving some functions under a new Administration for a Healthy America. A leaked budget showed the department’s budget could be slashed by $40 billion. The Office of Management and Budget released a "skinny budget" May 2, which mirrors many elements of the leaked budget.
In the Department of Veterans Affairs, more than 83,000 jobs will be cut, the union-led lawsuit estimates.
Public health leaders have decried the takeover of the humanitarian aid agency the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Most recently, the Trump administration announced it would move forward with instituting "Schedule F," a policy to make it easier to remove up to 50,000 more workers in the federal government.
Recent polling from KFF finds 6 in 10 Americans oppose major cuts to staffing and spending at federal health agencies, and a majority of respondents believe the DOGE has gone too far.
Although Republicans largely support actions taken by the Trump administration, most Republican respondents also oppose cuts toward infectious disease tracking, mental health services, Medicaid and Medicare.