Monday, May 19, 2025
spot_imgspot_img

Top 5 This Week

spot_imgspot_img

Related Posts

Judge Halts Trump’s Attempt to Downsize the Federal Government


A federal judge in California, Susan Illston, has temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s plans for reorganizations and reductions-in-force at 21 federal agencies. This ruling represents a significant obstacle to the government’s initiative aimed at downsizing. Illston affirmed that while the president can seek changes within executive branch agencies, he must do so lawfully and with legislative cooperation, especially for large-scale reorganizations. She emphasized that historically, presidents have sought and received such cooperation from Congress.

The temporary restraining order halts the “Department of Government Efficiency” Workforce Optimization Initiative and other related directives from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for two weeks. Illston, a Clinton appointee, argued that neither the OPM nor the OMB possesses the authority to direct other agencies to undertake vast layoffs or restructuring. She noted that DOGE lacks statutory authority for the actions it proposed.

While thousands of federal employees have already been affected by recent terminations since Trump’s inauguration in January, the administration has not disclosed how many. The blocked agencies include key departments such as Housing and Urban Development, Interior, and Transportation. The Trump administration contended that the lawsuit, filed on April 28, was untimely since the Executive Order had been issued several months earlier. However, Judge Illston stated that plaintiffs took reasonable time to assess potential harm from the Executive Orders and related memoranda.

A coalition of non-profits and unions expressed relief at the ruling, highlighting the chaos caused by the proposed reorganizations and their potential impact on federal services. Further arguments in the case are scheduled for May 22, while the White House has not responded to inquiries regarding the ruling.

Note: The image is for illustrative purposes only and is not the original image associated with the presented article. Due to copyright reasons, we are unable to use the original images. However, you can still enjoy the accurate and up-to-date content and information provided.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Popular Articles