Trump cleared by court to enforce firings at 20 US agencies

A federal appeals court on Wednesday freed the Trump administration to fire thousands of federal employees at 20 U.S. agencies, lifting a lower court order that had blocked the mass terminations.

In a 2-1 order, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the administration was likely to succeed against a case brought by officials from 19 states and Washington, D.C. The Democratic attorneys general had challenged the firings of federal workers with probationary status. A federal judge in Maryland issued an injunction that applied in the jurisdictions that sued.

It's the latest decision to bolster efforts by President Donald Trump to dramatically cut down the size of the federal workforce. The 4th Circuit majority cited a Tuesday order from the U.S. Supreme Court, which paused a different ruling from a California federal judge that had blocked the firing of probationary employees at six U.S. agencies nationwide.

Read More:  Trump's executive orders threaten social and community efforts beyond DEI

The jobs of tens of thousands of federal workers are at stake in the two cases. Probationary status means that an agency worker has been in their position for less than one or two years, depending on the job, but included long-term employees with recent promotions.

The state and local officials that sued alerted the court that they planned to ask the full 4th Circuit to reconsider the panel's decision. They asked the three-judge panel to pause its latest order siding with the administration, arguing there would be "chaos" if the mass firings resumed in the middle of the court proceedings, but the panel voted 2-1 to deny that request. 

White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement that the court had "stopped a district court's erroneous order directing the Trump Administration to rehire already fired probationary employees, vindicating the President's removal powers. The Trump Administration continues to rack up legal wins for the American people."

The 4th Circuit panel split over whether the Supreme Court's order earlier in the week in the California case was relevant. Judge Allison Rushing, appointed by Trump in his first term, reasoned that the injunctions are "similar." She was joined by Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson, nominated by former president Ronald Reagan.

Read more:  What Trump tariffs mean for hiring and benefits

Judge DeAndrea Benjamin dissented, writing that the high court's order was rooted in specific allegations raised by the unions and nonprofit organizations that sued in California about how they were affected by the mass firings. The states and Washington brought different types of claims to support their standing to be in court so the Supreme Court's earlier order shouldn't dictate the outcome, wrote Benjamin, who was appointed by Joe Biden.

Rushing and Wilkinson also found that the administration would suffer an injury unless the court stepped in because it is paying the reinstated employees and isn't likely to get those funds back if it ultimately wins the case. Rushing cited another recent order from the Supreme Court that cited concerns about the government's ability to recoup money in a case challenging Trump's cuts to federal funding for teacher training programs. 

The case is Maryland v. Department of Agriculture, 25-1248, 4th Circuit Court of Appeals (Richmond).