In a bold move to slash the size of the federal workforce, the Trump administration has turned to the highest court in the land, seeking to overturn a judicial roadblock on massive layoffs across multiple government agencies. The request to the Supreme Court comes after a federal judge in San Francisco halted the plan, siding with a coalition of unions, non-profits, and local governments who challenged the sweeping cuts.
The controversy centers on the Trump directive issued this February, ordering agencies like Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, State, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs to prepare for broad “reductions in force.” These layoffs are part of an ambitious effort to reshape and streamline the federal government’s sprawling bureaucracy.
But Judge Susan Illston ruled in late May that the president had overstepped his authority, emphasizing that such sweeping agency restructuring requires explicit congressional approval. She blocked the layoffs and even ordered the reinstatement of workers already dismissed, calling the president’s move a constitutional overreach.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals backed Illston’s decision, describing the administration’s plan as an unprecedented attempt to overhaul federal operations that exceeded presidential powers. The appellate panel denied the administration’s bid to pause the judge’s injunction, stating that the plaintiffs were likely to win their case.
Now, the administration argues before the Supreme Court that managing federal personnel is a core executive function, firmly within the president’s constitutional authority under Article II. They assert there’s no presumption against presidential control of staffing and no need for congressional permission to initiate these workforce changes.
The Supreme Court has asked the opposing parties to respond by June 9, setting the stage for a high-stakes showdown over the limits of executive power and the future shape of the federal government’s workforce. This legal battle highlights the ongoing tug-of-war over how far the president can go to reshape the federal bureaucracy without legislative backing.
