The Supreme Court has given the green light for President Donald Trump’s efforts to downsize the federal workforce dramatically.
In an emergency ruling issued Tuesday, the highest court in the land rebuked an activist district judge who tried to stop Trump’s mass layoffs at federal agencies.
Those firings can now proceed, pending a legal battle.
In a statement, White House spokesman Harrison Fields said:
“Today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling is another definitive victory for the President and his administration.
“It clearly rebukes the continued assaults on the President’s constitutionally authorized executive powers by leftist judges who are trying to prevent the President from achieving government efficiency across the federal government.”
A Democrat-aligned district judge in San Francisco had frozen Trump’s executive order calling for “reductions in force” at federal agencies.
Trump’s order was accompanied by a joint memo from the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management implementing the directive.
In a short, unsigned opinion, the Supreme Court lifted the injunction.
The high court found that Trump is likely to succeed on the argument that his order is lawful.
“Because the Government is likely to succeed on its argument that the Executive Order and Memorandum are lawful—and because the other factors bearing on whether to grant a stay are satisfied— we grant the application,” the justices wrote.
“We express no view on the legality of any Agency RIF and Reorganization Plan produced or approved pursuant to the Executive Order and Memorandum.”
The decision adds to a winning streak for Trump, who has received a string of favorable Supreme Court rulings upholding his executive power over immigration and other matters.
The Trump administration had blasted the district court’s injunction, which required congressional approval before mass layoffs, as an affront to the president’s authority over the executive branch.
“It interferes with the Executive Branch’s internal operations and unquestioned legal authority to plan and carry out RIFs [reductions in force], and does so on a government-wide scale,” Solicitor General John D. Sauer wrote to the Supreme Court.
The only justice to dissent from the Supreme Court’s ruling, Ketanji Brown Jackson, accused her colleagues of “enthusiasm for greenlighting this President’s legally dubious actions in an emergency posture.”
“This executive action promises mass employee terminations, widespread cancellation of federal programs and services, and the dismantling of much of the Federal Government as Congress has created it,” she wrote in scathing dissent.
In a short concurring opinion, Sonia Sotomayor agreed with Jackson’s view that federal restructuring must adhere to constraints set by Congress.
However, Sotomayor noted that Trump’s order explicitly calls for restructuring to be “consistent with applicable law.”
Sotomayor withheld judgment, since Trump’s specific agency plans are not currently in front of the court.
“[W]e thus have no occasion to consider whether they can and will be carried out consistent with the constraints of law,” Sotomayor wrote.
“I join the court’s stay because it leaves the district court free to consider those questions in the first instance.”
The non-profits and labor unions that challenged Trump lamented the Supreme Court’s decision as a “serious blow to our democracy.”
READ MORE – Trump: James Comey & John Brennan Are ‘Crooked as Hell’ – ‘They Have to Pay a Price’
Be the first to comment