After a Supreme Court ruling on Tuesday, federal agencies can move forward with President Trump’s significant layoff initiative.
This emergency decision, which passed with an 8-1 vote, lifts a major barrier to Trump’s plan for substantial reductions in federal staffing. However, a series of existing injunctions complicates matters as certain agencies continue to maintain their personnel levels.
As ongoing legal disputes linger and new laws might come into play, this ruling empowers the Trump administration to initiate layoffs across 17 different agencies where widespread cuts are expected.
Here’s a rundown of the situation.
Majority of agencies can restart layoffs
The Trump administration had already begun the process of letting go thousands of federal employees when legal challenges interrupted those efforts.
The Supreme Court’s decision clears a path for agencies to proceed with the implementation of Trump’s executive order from February 11.
The ruling lifted a lower court injunction that had blocked 22 agencies from acting on the order, thus preventing them from carrying out layoffs.
Among these agencies, the Government Efficiency Office, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) are considered key players in moving this initiative forward. A judge noted their significance as Trump’s “central decision makers.”
However, out of the remaining 19, ongoing legal cases still restrict reductions in the Department of Health and Human Services and the US Department of Human Services, which remain under injunction.
This means 17 agencies are now cleared to proceed following the court’s latest ruling.
The agencies include Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Housing, Urban Development, Internal Revenue Service, Labor, State, Treasury, Transportation, and Veterans Affairs. Additionally, the Environmental Protection Agency, General Services Administration, National Labor Relations Board, National Science Foundation, Peace Corps, Small Business Administration, and the Social Security Administration are also able to commence layoffs.
So, only four of the country’s 15 enforcement agencies—the Departments of Defense, Education, Homeland Security, and Justice—remain untouched. However, separate lawsuits are already constraining layoffs in the education sector.
What’s on the horizon for RIF directives?
Trump’s February executive order had instructed agencies to develop a plan for reformatting their layoff lists and personnel by April 14. With the process now paused due to the legal injunction, compliant departments were waiting for OMB’s approval.
At this moment, agencies are geared up to implement their planned reductions and are likely to act quickly.
Joint communications from OPM and OMB are urging agencies to seek exemptions that would shorten the time frame for notifying employees about layoffs—from the typical 60 days down to just 30.
While Justice remains distant from the proceedings, it emphasizes that no decisions have been made on whether the reorganization plans fit within legal limits.
Trump’s administration will need to adhere to various protocols while executing the RIF. This includes specifics about which employees will be let go and, in some instances, notifying congressional representatives or unions.
The plans could eventually be brought back to the courts for further scrutiny.
On Tuesday, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson openly disagreed with the ruling, yet one of her colleagues from the Democrat-appointed judges expressed some willingness to consider Jackson’s perspective.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor remarked in a brief opinion that Trump couldn’t undertake a restructuring of federal agencies in a manner that goes against congressional mandates.
“The plan itself isn’t under review at this point, so we can’t determine whether or not it aligns with legal constraints,” she cautioned.
Layoffs still face obstacles
Certain layoffs are hindered by ongoing legal challenges.
For instance, a court has prohibited cuts affecting almost 10,000 employees at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) due to a lawsuit led by Democratic states. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had announced these layoffs in late March as part of a significant restructuring initiative.
In a separate case, US District Judge Matthew Maddox mandated that AmeriCorps restore positions that were eliminated or put on leave during the RIF process. Maddox, also a Biden appointee, has stopped any new cuts affecting union workers.
These court orders are quite formidable. A small number of judges have blocked agency-specific layoffs under different policy justifications, such as Trump’s vow to reduce capacity in education.
Democratic-led states, school districts, and unions have successfully convinced US District Judge Myung-Goo Jun to temporarily stop layoffs impacting around half of the Department of Education’s workforce.
In response, the administration has swiftly appealed to the Supreme Court to lift these restrictions.
Outside of RIF, courts have also halted the firing of probationary employees while dealing with multiple terminations tied to the OPM framework.
Various other cases continue to be processed through the lower courts.
In one instance, a federal appeals court agreed to block layoffs at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a move that could affect around 90% of its workforce. This injunction remains in place until the appellate court resolves the matter.
Additionally, federal judges have overturned significant layoffs at the US African Development Foundation and the Inter-American Foundation, both of which support democratic and development initiatives in Africa and Latin America. Judges found that Trump’s appointment of Pete Marrocco to lead these groups was illegal, thereby invalidating his related actions. Marrocco was placed in his role following Trump’s executive order issued on February 19, which called for maximum possible exclusions.
