Appeals Court Denies Trump Admin’s Bid to Stay Order Blocking Mass Firings of Federal Workers

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals says the Trump administration has ‘not identified a federal statute’ granting the authority to conduct mass firings.

People speak with job placement and professional development representatives during a job fair for federal workers fired in recent weeks through job cuts, organized by the National Treasury Employees Union in Kansas City, Mo., on March 15, 2025. Chase Castor/Reuters

A San Francisco-based federal appeals court on May 30 denied the Trump administration’s bid to pause a lower court ruling that had blocked President Donald Trump’s directives for workforce reductions at federal agencies from taking effect.

In a 2–1 decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled—with one judge dissenting—that Trump’s executive order directing agency leaders to carry out mass firings “far exceeds the president’s supervisory powers under the Constitution.”

Circuit Judge William Fletcher stated that the administration has “not identified a federal statute” granting the authority to conduct large-scale workforce reductions and that the reorganization plans outlined in Trump’s order have “long been subject to Congressional approval.”

In her dissent, Circuit Judge Consuelo M. Callahan stated that federal agencies have statutory authority to lay off staff, which “contemplates that agency [reductions in force] may affect a significant number of employees.”

Callahan said that Trump’s order aimed to advance his “policy objective of reducing the size of the federal government” by directing agencies to initiate large-scale workforce reductions and to target departments that “perform functions not mandated by statute or other law.”

In an emailed statement to The Epoch Times, White House spokesperson Harrison Fields suggested that the administration is planning to challenge the court’s order.

“The president has the authority to exercise the power of the entire executive branch — singular district court judges cannot abuse the power of the entire judiciary to thwart the president’s agenda,” Fields stated. “The Trump administration will immediately fight back against this absurd order.”

The court’s decision follows U.S. District Judge Susan Illston’s temporary restraining order on May 9 that blocked the implementation of Trump’s order for two weeks. Illson determined that Trump overstepped his authority by issuing an order for large-scale reductions in force across agencies without getting congressional approval.

The judge said the Office of Personnel Management, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) do not have statutory power to direct other federal agencies to conduct large-scale staff terminations and restructuring.

The order applies to multiple federal agencies, including the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, Transportation, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the American Federation of Government Employees, Alliance for Retired Americans, American Public Health Association, and Center for Taxpayer Rights and the cities and counties in California, Illinois, Maryland, Texas, and Washington.

The coalition said in a statement released by Democracy Forward, the nonprofit legal organization representing the plaintiffs, on May 9 that the administration’s actions would disrupt critical services.

Since the start of the Trump administration on Jan. 20, thousands of government employees have been laid off across multiple agencies, while others have opted to leave under a buyout program offered by the administration, amid ongoing cost-cutting efforts by DOGE, which has been tasked by Trump with identifying and eliminating fraud and waste within the federal government.