Trump administration seeks Supreme Court to stop judge’s directive to rehire federal workers on probation

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to pause a ruling that mandates the rehiring of numerous federal workers who were dismissed in large-scale firings aimed at significantly reducing the size of the federal government.

In an emergency appeal, it is contended that the judge lacks the authority to compel the executive branch to bring back around 16,000 probationary employees. The judge in California determined that the dismissals were not in accordance with federal law and directed that offers of reinstatement should be dispatched while a lawsuit is ongoing.

Additionally, the appeal urges the conservative-led court to limit the increasing number of federal judges who have obstructed President Donald Trump’s sweeping agenda, for the time being.

“Only this Court can end the interbranch power grab,” the appeal stated.

The courts have become ground zero for pushback to Trump with the Republican-led Congress largely supportive or silent, and judges have ruled against Trump’s administration more than three dozen times after finding violations of federal law.

The rulings run the gamut from birthright citizenship changes to federal spending to transgender rights.

The order appealed Monday was one of two handed down the same day that both found separate legal problems with the way the Republican administration’s firings of probationary employees were carried out.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco ruled that the terminations were improperly directed by the Office of Personnel Management and its acting director. He ordered rehirings at six agencies: the departments of Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Defense, Energy, the Interior and the Treasury.

His order came in a lawsuit filed by a coalition of labor unions and nonprofit organizations.

Alsup, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton, also expressed frustration with what he called the government’s attempt to sidestep laws and regulations governing a reduction in its workforce – which it is allowed to do – by firing probationary workers with fewer legal protections.

He was appalled that employees were told they were being fired for poor performance despite receiving glowing evaluations just months earlier.