The administration of President Donald Trump appealed on Friday a federal judge's decision that extended a block on mass layoffs by federal agencies, a key piece of the Republican president's plans to downsize the U.S. government.
In an order late Thursday, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston barred agencies from mass layoffs pending the outcome of a lawsuit by unions, nonprofits and municipalities, saying Trump needed permission from Congress before reorganizing federal agencies.
The Trump administration appealed the decision to the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and will likely ask the court to pause Illston's ruling pending the outcome of the appeal.
The decision was the latest instance of a federal judge checking an aggressive push by Trump and billionaire adviser Elon Musk to drastically shrink or eliminate many federal agencies, make it easier to fire government workers and strip them of the ability to join unions.
On May 9, Illston had blocked about 20 agencies from making mass layoffs for two weeks and ordered the reinstatement of workers who had already lost their jobs.
In Thursday's late-night order, she largely continued the relief provided in the temporary restraining order.
"The President has the authority to seek changes to executive branch agencies, but he must do so in lawful ways and, in the case of large-scale reorganizations, with the cooperation of the legislative branch," wrote Illston, an appointee of Democrat former President Bill Clinton.
Illston said her order "shall not limit federal agency defendants from presenting reorganization proposals for legislative approval or engaging in their own internal planning activities" without direction from the White House.
The administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to pause Illston's May 9 ruling, saying she improperly infringed on Trump's constitutional powers to control the executive branch. That bid could be moot after Thursday's ruling.
Federal agencies have broad authority to implement large-scale layoffs, government lawyer Andrew Bernie said at Thursday's hearing.
An executive order issued by Trump merely asked agencies to determine what cuts can be made without calling for any concrete actions such as layoffs or office closures that plaintiffs could sue over at this point, he added.
"Those decisions will be disclosed when they are made, and when they are made, the plaintiffs can challenge them. Indeed, the plaintiffs have challenged individual decisions,” Bernie said, citing pending lawsuits over cuts at the departments of Education, Health and Human Services and Homeland Security.
Danielle Leonard, who represented the plaintiffs, said directives from Trump and other White House officials made clear that agencies had little say in whether to gut their workforces.
"They are saying what to cut, when to cut, where to cut, and all they’re asking the agencies to do is come forward with a plan," she said.
The case involves the departments of agriculture, health and human services, treasury, commerce, state and veterans affairs, among others.
Trump has urged agencies to eliminate duplicative roles, unnecessary management layers, and non-critical jobs while automating routine tasks, closing regional offices and cutting back on outside contractors.
About 260,000 federal workers, most of whom have taken buyouts, have left or will leave by the end of September. And several agencies have been earmarked for deep cuts, such as more than 80,000 jobs at the Department of Veterans Affairs and 10,000 at the Department of Health and Human Services.
Dozens of lawsuits have challenged the administration's efforts, and Illston's earlier ruling this month was the broadest yet of its kind.
An appeals court has paused another judge's March ruling requiring agencies to reinstate nearly 25,000 probationary employees, who typically have been in their current roles for less than a year or two.
© 2025 Thomson/Reuters. All rights reserved.