On Thursday, a federal judge rejected an appeal from labor unions aimed at preventing the Trump administration from executing mass layoffs within federal agencies.
U.S. District Judge Christopher R. Cooper expressed understanding for the National Treasury Employees Union and the other four unions that sought a restraining order to temporarily stop the layoffs. However, he stated that federal court was not the proper venue for their lawsuit.
“NTEU does not demonstrate that it is likely to prevail on the merits, as this Court likely does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted. Therefore, the Court will deny the unions’ motion for a temporary restraining order and, for the same reasons, their request for a preliminary injunction,” Cooper articulated in his ruling.
The unions aimed to stop the mass termination of probationary employees and President Donald Trump’s executive order from February 11 regarding “large-scale reductions” in the federal workforce. The judge determined that such claims should be directed to the Federal Labor Relations Authority, a three-member body that addresses federal labor disputes.
He noted that claims adjudicated there could undergo “judicial review in the courts of appeals.”
Stay updated with live political coverage here
The NTEU case represents the most comprehensive lawsuit filed against the administration concerning federal layoffs to date. Another case is in progress in California regarding probationary workers—those who are new hires or long-time employees recently promoted—and other actions concerning firings at specific agencies.
The NTEU suit also contested the administration’s mass “deferred resignation” buyouts as part of the layoffs situation. Recently, a federal judge in Boston permitted that program to continue because the unions lacked the legal standing to challenge it.
Doreen Greenwald, the national president of NTEU, referred to the judge’s ruling as “a temporary setback.”
“The lawsuit we filed with our labor union partners will be heard, and federal employees will have their opportunity in court to contest the unlawful mass firings and other assaults on their jobs, their agencies, and their commitment to the country. Numerous federal employees and their families have already suffered greatly from these indiscriminate layoffs, and local economies will soon feel the repercussions as well,” she stated, characterizing the administration’s actions as “an illegal end-run around Congress.”
The White House did not provide an immediate response regarding the ruling.
The judge opened his 16-page ruling with a sympathetic tone.
“The initial month of President Trump’s second administration has been marked by a barrage of executive actions that have led to, according to some, intentional disruption and chaos across various sectors of American society. Affected citizens and their advocates have urgently challenged many of these actions in this Court and others nationwide,” he remarked.
“Some of the President’s actions have been temporarily suspended; others have been allowed to proceed, at least for now. These mixed outcomes should not come as a surprise. Federal district judges are obliged to resolve legal issues through an even-handed application of law and precedent—regardless of the identities of the litigants or, regrettably at times, the implications of their rulings for ordinary citizens.”
