For weeks, thousands of federal employees have been waiting for the Supreme Court to make a decision about their continued employment with the government. On Tuesday, they got their answer: The Trump administration could move ahead with mass layoffs.
The question of whether the layoffs are legal remains unanswered. For now, workers remain in limbo, this time waiting for their agencies to decide who stays, who goes and when.
President Trump in February issued an executive order calling for mass layoffs at nearly every government agency, but the directive invited some legal challenges that led to federal workers staying in their jobs temporarily, or at least collecting a paycheck and health benefits.
Many government employees have described the protracted uncertainty as a stressful, nightmarish slog.
And many knew that any relief was likely temporary. For months, a number of them have described being scared to open their government emails, anticipating that they would learn they had been fired. Many feared that speaking out would put a target on their backs.
One employee at the Environmental Protection Agency, which has not announced a detailed plan for layoffs, said that she and her colleagues were waiting to hear about what the Supreme Court’s move meant for them. Like others still employed by the government, she spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution.
The Supreme Court’s decision on Tuesday stemmed from a lawsuit brought by labor unions, advocacy groups and local governments. The Office of Personnel Management and the White House had directed agencies earlier this year to submit plans for large-scale layoffs, or so-called reductions in force. The Department of Health and Human Services laid off 10,000 employees on April 1, and other agencies had been expected to follow suit.
The groups that sued argued that the president could not make such sweeping changes to federal agencies without congressional approval. Judge Susan Illston of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California found that the executive branch had likely overstepped, and paused the government’s plans for layoffs at more than 20 agencies.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday overruled her.
The coalition behind the court challenge said it would continue to fight the case, arguing that the layoffs would threaten critical public services.
“This decision does not change the simple and clear fact that reorganizing government functions and laying off federal workers en masse haphazardly without any congressional approval is not allowed by our Constitution,” the groups and local governments said in a statement.
Judge Illston’s pause, ordered in May, covered nearly two dozen federal agencies at different stages of their layoff plans.
In some cases, federal employees had been notified by their agencies that they were part of future layoffs, but were put on paid leave, with departure dates that fell after Judge Illston’s decision. Those employees, including dozens of workers at the State and Labor Departments, are now waiting to learn when they will be formally terminated, and whether they will have to return what they have been paid while on leave.
About 2,000 employees at the State Department are waiting for official notification that they will be laid off. The agency already notified Congress about the positions that would be included in layoffs, so most of the employees are already aware of their fates. But the formal notices have been held up by the court order.
Most federal employees expect their agencies to announce layoffs, but do not know if they will be among those cut.
If courts ultimately find that the layoffs are illegal, federal workers would receive a minimum of back pay for the period when they had been illegally terminated, according to Nick Bednar, an administrative law expert at the University of Minnesota.
In these situations, employees may be entitled to get their jobs back. But the cases could drag on for so long that the government would be reorganized by the time a decision comes. There may not be jobs for the fired employees to go back to.
Since Mr. Trump called for widespread layoffs in an executive order, thousands of federal workers have decided to leave the government, accepting early retirement incentives to avoid the stress of waiting to learn their fates. This, too, has changed the calculations for layoffs across agencies.
On Monday, Doug Collins, the veterans affairs secretary, said that his agency would not need to conduct widespread layoffs because 17,000 employees had resigned since January. Mr. Collins added that the agency expected another 12,000 people to resign or retire by the end of September.
Tom Yazdgerdi, the president of the American Foreign Service Association, said he was concerned that the State Department would announce more layoffs beyond the 1,900 it had previously disclosed to Congress.
“With this Supreme Court decision, the administration now has a green light to hobble the diplomatic work force in real time,” he said. “While we don’t know the exact numbers as yet, this shortsighted move will inflict lasting damage on America’s diplomatic capacity and our foreign service work force, which is already stretched thin.”
Eileen Sullivan is a Times reporter covering the changes to the federal work force under the Trump administration.
Chris Cameron is a Times reporter covering Washington, focusing on breaking news and the Trump administration.
The post Trump Got the Green Light to Fire Federal Workers. Now, They Wait. appeared first on New York Times.
