SAN FRANCISCO—To union cheers, in the biggest legal challenge to Donald Trump’s and Elon Musk’s wholesale firings of federal workers and closure of programs and agencies, a federal judge in San Francisco banned the firings for two weeks. Senior Judge Susan Illston told both sides—including unions who led the fight–to be in court on May 22 to argue if the ban should be permanent.
“It is the prerogative of presidents to pursue new policy priorities and to imprint their stamp on the federal government,” Judge Illston ruled on May 9. “But to make large-scale overhauls of federal agencies, any president must enlist the help of his co-equal branch and partner, the Congress.”
“Federal courts should not micromanage the vast federal workforce, but courts must sometimes act to preserve the proper checks and balances between the three branches of government. As a group of conservative former government officials and advisors have written to the court, ‘Unchecked presidential power is not what the Framers had in mind,’” Judge Illston laconically added.
The unions and their allies, led by the Government Employees (AFGE) and AFSCME, produced enough evidence, the judge wrote, to show they likely could win on the merits of the case because Trump didn’t follow the Constitution and didn’t get lawmakers’ approval for his meat-axe approach. Other unions suing Trump included the Service Employees and its Local 1000 and four AFGE locals.
Depending on the eventual outcome of the case, which even the judge predicted would be appealed to higher courts, the impact could be profound on everyone in the U.S., not just the federal workers.
That’s because the unions presented evidence showing the impact on voters and residents, as well as workers, in Trump’s plans to fire approximately 175,000 federal workers—so far—and eliminate the union contracts which cover a million more.
The corporate class which backs Trump and his partner multibillionaire Musk, favors such budget cuts, for several reasons. One is the cuts would force more people onto jobless rolls, thus costing workers labor market leverage.
Another is the federal government and its agencies can either step in where private industry cannot or will not, because there’s no profit involved, such as in Superfund cleanups. Now they won’t be able to do so. And a third is the fewer federal workers there are, especially in safety and health on the job and checking our food and medicines, the more that corporate criminals can get away with.
And, as the AFL-CIO has pointed out, federal workers, agencies and programs are only Trump’s and Musk’s first targets. The rest of us, especially union members, are next.
Fired almost everyone
“There are (or were) 222 NIOSH employees in the Pittsburgh office” of the National Institutes of Occupational Safety and Health “who research health hazards faced by mineworkers,” Judge Illston wrote in one example. “According to the union that represents many of these employees, the department’s reduction-in-force will terminate 221 of the 222.”
Also fired: All but 50 of the 485 workers in the Labor Department’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance, which rides herd on federal contractors—including more than 1000 in California alone—to ensure they obey anti-discrimination laws in hiring, firing and promotions.
Despite Judge Illston’s decision and others, Congress’s ruling Republicans, in both houses, seem hell-bent on slashing government spending, workers and programs, as Trump demands.
Just days after Judge Illston backed the workers, agencies and programs, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., unveiled the latest version of a so-called “reconciliation” bill, demanding an $880 billion eight-to-10-year cut in federal health care spending.
Most of that, $715 billion, would come from Medicaid, the program which pays for health care for the poor, the disabled and at least half of the nation’s nursing home patients. States share in Medicaid payments and would be forced to either make up the difference or throw people off the Medicaid rolls and out into the streets.
The unions who sued welcomed the judge’s ruling, even if it’s only a temporary ban on the Trump administratrion’s mass firings.
“Although the president’s executive order” for the firings “seeks to radically reorganize and deconstruct federal agencies through massive reductions in force, the groups make clear only Congress has the power to change the federal government in ways the president directed,” said the coalition, which also included environmental and non-profit groups.
Trump’s “reckless attempt to dismantle our government without congressional approval threatens vital services Americans depend on every day—from caring for veterans and safeguarding public health, to protecting our environment and maintaining national security,” said Government Employees President Everett Kelley.
“This illegal power grab would gut federal agencies, disrupt communities nationwide, and put critical public services at risk. AFGE is proud to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with this coalition to protect not just the patriotic public servants we represent, but the integrity of American government and the essential services our nation deserves.”
“We…challenge the hostile takeover of government by billionaires and anti-union extremists,” said AFSCME President Lee Saunders. “From the mass firings of federal employees to effectively shutting down agencies formed by Congress, this White House has repeatedly broken the law and violated the Constitution to advance their extremist Project 2025 agenda.
“Working people deserve to know the public services they depend on will be delivered–that their food will be safe to eat and drinking water clean, that kids in school will have the resources they need to thrive and that our communities will be able to fight public health epidemics. All these things and more are at stake if this power grab goes unchecked.”
The labor-backed Alliance for Retired Americans was one of 11 non-profit groups which joined the lawsuit. Alliance Executive Director Richard Fiesta warned of the consequences to Social Security if Trump and Musk—after firing 7,000 of its workers—got the go-ahead to slash benefits, too:
“Seniors have a right to the guaranteed benefits they have earned as well as to a fully staffed, well-functioning Social Security Administration to administer those benefits in a timely and secure manner,” said Fiesta.
We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!
CONTRIBUTOR
MOST POPULAR TODAY
Appeals Court gives Trump green light to trash federal workers’ union contracts
DOJ opens civil rights investigation after Chicago mayor celebrates office’s diversity
Trump lawyers tell Supreme Court that Constitution doesn’t apply to the president
With NDP losses in Canadian election, labor has little choice but independent political action
