Judge orders Trump to reinstate probationary employees

Image Source.

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

In a ruling today that was largely expected by legal analysts, but greatly upset MAGA Trump supporters, a federal judge has ruled that the firing of federal employees by the Trump Administration was illegal, allowing up to 24,000 federal employees to return to work.

Because the judge was a Bill Clinton appointee, the MAGA crowd called “foul!” and blamed the ruling on partisan politics, with many claiming that President Trump has the right to fire whomever he wants to.

But in rushing to judgment about this ruling, it is doubtful that the Trump supporters even read the judge’s ruling and the facts of the case, as Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) did not even argue this point (that Trump has a right to fire whomever he wants to), but in fact took the opposite position that Trump did not fire anyone, but instead gave “guidance” to the various agencies through the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and that then the agencies themselves determined who should be fired.

The judge didn’t buy that, mainly because when he ordered the acting OMB director Charles Ezell to testify in court about this “guidance”, Trump’s legal team did not allow him to testify, and instead withdrew his “declaration” so that he did not have to testify in court and obey the judge’s summons.

The judge essentially accused the Trump Administration of lying.

A federal judge has ordered half a dozen federal agencies to “immediately” reinstate probationary employees fired last month as part of the Trump administration’s effort to rapidly shrink the federal workforce, calling the effort a “sham.”

The preliminary injunction issued from the bench Thursday by US District Judge William Alsup requires the departments of Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior and Treasury to rehire the employees. The judge said that he might extend the order to cover other federal agencies at a later time.

Alsup  said he was making the ruling because he believes the Office of Personnel Management unlawfully directed the agencies earlier this year to lay off the probationary employees, who generally have been on the job for less than a year.

“The court finds that Office of Personnel Management did direct all agencies to terminate probationary employees with the exception of mission critical employees,”

he said, rejecting arguments from the Justice Department that OPM merely issued “guidance” to the agencies that then led to the firings.

The judge said the order is effective immediately: “This is the order and it counts.”

The ruling came in a case brought by labor unions and others challenging OPM’s role in the firings, which affected thousands of employees and sent shockwaves through various federal agencies, some of which later rehired some of the workers.

Alsup was highly critical of the administration’s justification for firing the employees. OPM had provided agencies with a template termination letter that cited the employee’s “performance” as the reason they were being let go. But the judge said that rationale was the government’s attempt to end-run federal law setting up specific rules for reducing the federal workforce.

“The reason that OPM wanted to put this based on performance was at least in part in my judgment a gimmick to avoid the Reductions in Force Act,” the judge said.

“Because the law always allows you to fire somebody for performance.”

“It is a sad day when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance when they know good and well that’s a lie,” he added.

“That should not have been done in our country. It was a sham in order to try to avoid statutory requirements.”

The decision came after Alsup unloaded on the Justice Department for not making the acting head of the Office of Personnel Management available to testify about the Trump administration’s decision to fire scores of probationary employees.

He had ordered acting OMB director Charles Ezell to testify during Thursday’s hearing, where he would likely face tough questions from attorneys representing the labor unions that are challenging his agency’s role in the firings.

But the Justice Department refused to make him available and instead withdrew a declaration Ezell submitted last month that had served as the government’s only evidence in the case.

“You’re afraid to do so because you know cross-examination will reveal the truth,” Alsup told DOJ attorney Kelsey Helland.

“I tend to doubt that you’re telling me the truth.” (Source.)

[…]

In a recent interview with David Knight, Catherine Austin Fitts explains that it is easy to cut out this wasteful government spending LEGALLY, and that the current administration run by Musk Trump, has no intention of shrinking the size of government.

They just want to eliminate the public sector and move them into the private sector where they have more control over the population.

Listen to this 7-minute section from the longer interview you can find here.

It is easy to see that the agencies the Trump administration wants to eliminate in many cases are the ones investigating Musk and standing in the way of Big Tech, which is also providing all the technology for the surveillance state which we now see in Gaza and the West Bank, as these Big Tech companies, like SpaceX and Palantir, have now become rich on Government military contracts.

If Trump was truly serious about eliminating the U.S. Government debt, he could just let the federal government shut down completely, which would bring pain and suffering across the board to ALL Americans, regardless of their political biases.

But that is NOT what he wants, as is evidence from his most recent attacks against Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie, who is the lone Republican in the House of Representatives who did not support the “Continuing Resolution” (CR) bill to keep funding the federal government that passed in the House yesterday.

Trump was so angry with him, that he threatened Representative Massie, stating that he would make sure he is defeated in the next primary election in his district in Kentucky.

However, Massie is far more popular than Donald Trump is in his home district, and he has been threatened before by Trump, as well as by the Israeli lobby group AIPAC, but to no avail.

In the 2024 elections, Massie got over 70% of the vote in the Republican primaries, and that was with AIPAC spending $millions to try to defeat him.

In the general election against his Democrat opponent, he won with over 99% of the vote: 278,386 to 1,130.

Massie is not going anywhere, and Trump’s attacks against him have just solidified Massie’s support and made him even more popular.

Donald Trump’s Attack on Thomas Massie Sparks Republican Pushback

President Donald Trump has received pushback from Republicans after calling for Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie to be voted out of office.

In a Monday post on Truth Social, the president said he would “lead the charge” in ousting Massie after the GOP lawmaker announced he would not support the Trump-backed government funding bill.

Massie confirmed Monday that he would not support for the short-term spending bill because it maintains federal funding at current levels without considering budget cuts overseen by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Trump later called for Massie to be ousted from office, saying he would support any challenger in a GOP primary.

Trump also compared Massie to former Wyoming Representative Liz Cheney, whose political career in the Republican Party collapsed after she opposed and criticized Trump for his actions surrounding the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

A number of Republican and Libertarian figures have since voiced support for Massie on social media, suggesting Trump is making a mistake by attacking the Kentucky lawmaker. (Source.)

[…]

Via https://vaccineimpact.com/2025/judge-rules-against-trumps-illegal-firing-of-federal-employees-setback-for-musks-goals-as-opposition-grows/