The US Supreme Court on Tuesday lifted a lower court’s block on President Donald Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to prepare for sweeping reductions in the federal workforce.
The unsigned opinion from the Court grants the Trump Administration the ability to move forward with the executive order while legal challenges continue. The ruling doesn’t end the dispute over the authority of the executive branch to carry out large-scale reductions in force without congressional approval, but it signals that the justices believe the Trump Administration is likely to succeed on the merits of the case.
The executive order in question was issued by President Trump in February, to “promptly undertake preparations to initiate large-scale reductions in force (RIFs), consistent with applicable law.” The administration followed up with a memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management to begin implementation.
Labor unions, advocacy groups, and several local governments filed suit in federal court, challenging the legality of the move and requesting an injunction to halt it. Senior US District Judge Susan Illston of San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction blocking implementation and required the government to provide planning documents related to the reductions.
When the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit refused to lift the injunction, Solicitor General D. John Sauer appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the injunction caused “ongoing and severe harm” to the government by interfering with the internal operations of the executive branch.
In its two-paragraph decision, the Supreme Court stated that Judge Illston’s injunction rested on a legal conclusion that the executive order and accompanying memorandum were unlawful. The majority, however, found that the government was likely correct in arguing that both documents are legal. Based on that conclusion and the other criteria, the Court put Illston’s ruling on hold. The Administration may move forward while the 9th Circuit appeal continues.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor concurred, noting that the executive order explicitly calls for plans that comply with existing law.
But Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson issued a 15-page dissent that said that the lower court’s injunction served as a temporary, harm-reducing measure while the legality of the executive order is assessed.
Jackson warned that allowing the order to proceed unchecked “permits an apparently unprecedented and congressionally unsanctioned dismantling of the Federal Government to continue apace, causing irreparable harm before courts can determine whether the President has the authority to engage in the actions he proposes.”
Drawing from her own experience as a former district court judge, Jackson made the nearly comical stretch that the lower court is best equipped to determine the actual scale and legal implications of the executive action. She concluded that the Supreme Court is just unable to do the job: “This Court lacks the capacity to fully evaluate, much less responsibly override, reasoned lower court fact finding.”
For now, the decision is a major victory for the Trump Administration as it seeks to reshape the size and structure of the federal government.