Connect with us

Congress

Judge extends order barring mass firings of federal workers during shutdown

Published

on

A federal judge has indefinitely extended her order banning the Trump administration from mass firing federal employees during the government shutdown.

Following a hearing Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston granted a preliminary injunction blocking reductions in force — better known as RIFs — at most major government agencies.

Barring further action by a higher court, Illston’s decision limits the Trump administration’s ability to continue downsizing the federal government and moves it has made to leverage the ongoing shutdown to cut federal programs and agencies favored by Democrats.

The Office of Personnel Management, the Office of Management and Budget “and the federal agency defendants are enjoined from issuing any more RIF notices because of the shutdown,” said Illston, a San Francisco-based Clinton appointee. The judge also barred the administration from implementing RIF notices issued during the shutdown and said she might hold further court proceedings to resolve disputes about some RIFs that were in the works just before the shutdown began on Oct. 1.

The Trump administration is expected to appeal Illston’s ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment. OMB spokespeople did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A Justice Department attorney defending the administration at the hearing Tuesday, Michael Velchik, said the firings were lawful and represented the will of the electorate expressed through President Donald Trump’s victory at the polls last year.

“The American people selected someone known above all else for his eloquence in communicating to employees that, ‘You’re fired!’” Velchik said, referring to Trump’s trademark line on his television show, “The Apprentice.”

However, Illston bluntly rejected the administration’s key arguments, including that the lapse in appropriations gave agencies new flexibility to fire workers because unfunded programs are no longer required by law.

“I think that’s completely wrong,” the judge said.

Velchik was undeterred. “I think that’s obviously correct. I think all three branches of government agree on that,” he said.

A lawyer representing the federal employee unions challenging the RIFs said that argument suggests Trump could permanently dismantle every federal agency simply because Congress failed to meet a funding deadline.

“What counsel is arguing is that if Congress lets funding lapse for one day, the president can fire the entire federal government. That is absurd,” the unions’ attorney, Danielle Leonard, said.

On Monday, one of the unions suing, AFGE, shifted its position in the shutdown fight. While it initially joined with other federal employee unions backing Democrats’ resistance to supporting a temporary funding bill, AFGE urged senators to support a three-week funding patch. It fell short in the Senate again Tuesday in a 54-45 vote.

Illston made clear at the outset of the hearing that she intended to issue an injunction that effectively extends a temporary restraining order she issued two weeks ago at the unions’ request. She called it “particularly ironic” that the federal employees sending out the RIF notices appeared to be violating the Anti-Deficiency Act, which prohibits the government from incurring expenses not authorized by Congress, but includes some exceptions for essential activities.

The judge also said she found some accounts from federal RIFed employees “very affecting.”

“I think it’s important that we remember that although we are here talking about statutes and administrative procedure and the like, we are also talking about human lives, and these human lives are being dramatically affected by the activities that we’re discussing this morning,” Illston said.

As an example, she cited an account by a RIFed Department of Housing and Urban Development employee who in a court filing on Oct. 21 wrote that she had never gone through anything as traumatizing as the current experience, including her combat deployment when she was in the Air Force.

The judge also mentioned another account filed in court on Oct. 21 from a RIFed IT specialist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who has been working for the federal government for more than 40 years.

“After 40 years of service, she’s eligible for retirement, but no one at Human Resources can answer her questions about the RIF notice or retiring, because most, if not all, of the HR staff have also been RIFed,” Illston said about the woman. “This is her second RIF notice. She got one earlier in April that was later rescinded.”

That was part of a spring round of RIFs at the Department of Health and Human Services. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said at the time that he sought to downsize the department by about a quarter, to about 62,000 employees.

Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought said earlier this month that he expected the total number of employees fired in connection with the shutdown would “probably end up being north of 10,000.”

Those plans appear to have been scaled back since then, partly due to resistance from other high-level officials in the Trump administration. Trump has said the firings and program terminations are aimed at getting Democrats to cry uncle in the budget fight by targeting constituencies and causes important to them.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

This is how Democrats say Oversight Republicans are trying to squash the Epstein investigation

Published

on

Members of both parties have for months been hijacking House Oversight Committee business to call votes on subpoenas for high-profile figures in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation — and Democrats say chair James Comer has quietly instituted a new strategy to contain the practice.

The Kentucky Republican’s workaround, they allege, is to hold “roundtables” on various issues within the panel’s jurisdiction rather than hearings. Roundtables are more informal and don’t permit members to offer motions to subpoena witnesses during unrelated committee business, as is allowed during hearings.

Over the past year, some GOP members have joined with Democrats to take advantage of the panel’s subpoena rules. In July, they voted on a surprise motion to release the full Epstein files when top congressional Republicans were dragging their feet. Lawmakers also compelled now-former Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify and were prepared to haul in Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, too, before he said he would appear before the committee voluntarily.

This trend is outlined in a new memo prepared by Oversight Democratic staff, obtained by Blue Light News, which claims that by moving to roundtables, Republicans “are avoiding the only forum where Democrats can force votes, demand documents, and hold the majority accountable.”

“We’ve heard from committee members, both Republicans and Democrats, that they are frustrated,” Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the committee, said in an interview Monday. “We have important investigative work, and they want to do this right as we are in the middle of this single, largest government cover-up in the modern history of the Congress. And they want to neuter the Oversight Committee. Give me a break.”

A spokesperson for Oversight Republicans, when reached for comment, did not address a question about whether the uptick in roundtables was intended to prevent subpoena votes. The spokesperson said the panel “continues to hold many hearings” and will host a markup on fraud prevention legislation next week.

“Roundtables provide opportunities to have more substantive and direct conversations with ordinary Americans about issues facing communities across the U.S.,” the spokesperson said.

But the members’ subpoena free-for-all over the past nine months has undoubtedly created a complicated political dynamic for Comer. He has become the de facto leader of the congressional Epstein probe, forcing him to balance calls for transparency with the political fallout of Trump’s onetime relationship with the late, convicted sex offender.

Republicans have noticed the connection between the spike in subpoenas and the subsequent increase in roundtables in lieu of hearings.

Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.), during a March subcommittee roundtable on mental health issues, at one point said, “It’s no secret why we are not doing a formal hearing today. We’d like this hearing to be solely focused on the issue before you, and there is some concern that — both parties are guilty of this — that they make motions in the middle of the hearing and try to bring up unrelated topics.”

Republicans have also gone on subpoena sprees of their own, most notably by forcing the February depositions of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) suggested she wasn’t happy about the new status quo.

While stopping short of criticizing roundtables directly, she said in an interview, “I am a fan of committees that like to do the motions to subpoena.”

The last full-committee hearing convened by House Oversight was in March, on fraud in Minnesota. At that hearing, Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina forced a vote to subpoena Bondi for her handling of the federal Epstein investigation. Five Republicans joined all Democrats present in voting for the subpoena motion, and Bondi’s recent ouster isn’t quelling calls for her to appear before the panel under oath.

Since that time, first lady Melania Trump delivered a public statement denying she was ever victimized by Epstein and urging Congress to hold hearings with true victims — an entreaty that could resonate with Mace and others who are bought into the subpoena exercise, though Comer has indicated he plans on having such hearings.

In the meantime, Oversight subcommittees have held five roundtables this year alone on topics such as artificial intelligence and the Internal Revenue Service. The full committee is scheduled to convene a sixth roundtable Tuesday morning addressing “lawfare against American agriculture.”

That’s compared to the two subcommittee roundtables listed for all of 2025; Comer hosted no full committee roundtables since becoming chair in 2023, the panel’s website shows.

Several Oversight Republicans said in interviews they appreciate the opportunity to examine policy areas without the partisan mudslinging and subpoena distractions that Oversight has become known for this term.

“When you’re really trying to get to the bottom of something, it’s a much more conducive way of doing it,” said Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.).

Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) argued during a recent committee hearing on the misuse of federal funds in Minnesota that the subpoena-happy approach taken by his colleagues is undermining the seriousness of the panel’s work.

“Listen to your Uncle Clay, America — you don’t just normally start out with a subpoena introduced as a vote by a member,” Higgins said. “I object to this process that is false and not reflective of the serious investigative work that the Oversight committee performs day in and day out.”

“Very well said,” Comer replied.

Continue Reading

Congress

House GOP leaders prep for farm bill floor fight ahead

Published

on

House Republican leaders are shifting into high gear to boost support for the farm bill ahead of next week’s planned vote on the package, according to a whip notice obtained by Blue Light News on Monday.

Leadership is preparing for a vote on the bill the week of April 27, with an amendment deadline of April 22, as POLITICO first reported.

GOP leadership will be talking to Republican lawmakers on the House floor during Tuesday’s 3 p.m. vote, recommending a “yes” vote on the bill, according to the notice.

The notice sent by Whip Tom Emmer’s floor director emphasizes that the bill is budget-neutral and prioritizes “responsible spending on agriculture,” language meant to appeal to fiscal conservatives who typically oppose spending on the massive package that governs all major nutrition and agriculture programs.

“This bill expands on investments in rural communities, returns science-backed management to our national forests, and restores regulatory certainty in the interstate marketplace,” according to the whip notice. “Interstate marketplace” refers to controversial provisions in the package that would bar states from requiring pesticide labeling that differs from EPA guidance and undo restrictions of livestock sales under laws like California’s Proposition 12.

Those moves have sown division among Republicans and created uncertainty that they can garner enough support to pass the package. House Agriculture Committee staffhave been in private whip talks with other caucus members for weeks since the markup in early March. The bill advanced out of committee in a 34-17 vote.

The whip notice also highlights Republican priorities like efforts to strengthen “Buy American” requirements for school meals and crack down on foreign purchases of U.S. farmland.

Negotiations on the farm bill — which is meant to be reauthorized every five years — have been stalled due to partisan fighting over nutrition and climate-smart agriculture policies. Republicans used a major cut to spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to pay for tax cuts and farm safety net improvements in their massive tax and spending package last year, sparking anger among Democrats.

House Ag Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) said in an interview Monday that he doesn’t expect the vote on the farm bill to be delayed due to other legislative battles like the ongoing fight over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

“I have not had any indication” of delays, Thompson said.

Continue Reading

Congress

Mejia sworn in to the House

Published

on

Democrat Analilia Mejia is the newest member of the House, sworn in Monday evening by Speaker Mike Johnson after winning a special election in New Jersey last week.

The move narrows Johnson’s majority to 217-214-1, meaning the GOP can afford no more than one defection on a party-line vote. But GOP leaders are confident they will gain a little more breathing room later this week.

The House Ethics Committee is set to render judgment on Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.) Tuesday, and Republicans granted anonymity to discuss internal conversations expect her to be expelled as soon as Wednesday.

Continue Reading

Trending