Judge halts Trump administration’s mass firing of federal workers

In a significant legal defeat for the Trump administration, a federal judge has put the brakes on a sweeping effort to fire thousands of federal workers. The ruling, issued by US District Judge William Alsup on Feb 27, orders the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to withdraw directives that led to mass terminations across several government agencies.

The decision follows a lawsuit filed by labor unions, who argued that the widespread firings were likely illegal. The affected employees, many of whom were in their first or second year of federal service, worked in key agencies such as the Department of Defense, the National Park Service, and the National Science Foundation. The OPM’s directive, issued in mid-February, had instructed agencies to dismiss probationary employees—moves unions say resulted in thousands of unjust firings.

“Congress has given the authority to hire and fire to the agencies themselves,” Judge Alsup stated. “The Office of Personnel Management does not have any authority whatsoever under any statute in the history of the universe to hire and fire employees at another agency.”

Unions call it ‘Massive Employment Fraud’

The ruling marks one of the most significant legal pushbacks against President Trump’s efforts to trim the federal workforce, a key component of his administration’s agenda. The American Federation of Government Employees, representing about 800,000 workers nationwide, led the charge against the administration, accusing it of orchestrating one of the largest employment fraud cases in U.S. history.

The controversy centers around the administration’s use of OPM to mandate the termination of probationary employees—a group that includes roughly 200,000 workers, or about 10% of the civilian federal workforce. According to unions, tens of thousands of employees were dismissed without due process, often receiving a generic email falsely citing poor performance.

“OPM, the federal agency charged with implementing this nation’s employment laws, in one fell swoop has perpetrated one of the most massive employment frauds in the history of this country,” union attorneys wrote in court documents. They pointed out that many fired employees had stellar performance reviews and were let go without any input from their supervisors.

Among those affected were workers responsible for wildfire prevention in California, Federal Aviation Administration staff, employees providing services to veterans, and researchers at the National Science Foundation.

Administration defends terminations, but Judge skeptical

The Justice Department, along with acting OPM Director Charles Ezell, pushed back against the lawsuit, arguing that the unions didn’t have the legal standing to challenge the terminations in court. They suggested the dispute should be handled by the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) or the Merit Systems Protection Board. However, this week, the Merit Systems Protection Board ruled in favor of six probationary employees, temporarily halting their dismissals—a decision that could impact thousands of other cases.

The administration’s legal team also maintained that the president has broad constitutional authority over the executive branch, including hiring and firing federal workers. But Judge Alsup wasn’t convinced.

“How could so much of the workforce be amputated, suddenly, overnight?” Alsup questioned during the hearing. “It’s so irregular and so widespread and so aberrant in the history of our country.”

The Justice Department further insisted that OPM wasn’t conducting mass firings but rather initiating a “focused review” of the workforce. However, internal documents from agencies like the Departments of Defense and Agriculture, the IRS, and Veterans Affairs suggested otherwise—confirming that OPM had directly instructed agencies to fire probationary employees.

Unions also revealed that agencies were given minimal discretion to challenge the firings. Reportedly, they were restricted to providing just 200 characters—essentially a single sentence—to justify keeping any individual worker.

What’s Next?

A separate federal judge in Washington, DC recently denied a similar request from unions for an immediate injunction, ruling that the matter should be handled by the FLRA. That decision came amid turmoil within the agency after President Trump removed its chairwoman before her term ended in July.

For now, the legal battle isn’t over. The unions’ victory in San Francisco has stopped the mass firings — for now. However, as the case moves forward in court, the broader fight over the Trump administration’s efforts to overhaul the federal workforce is far from settled.