Chalk up another loss for Trump in the Courts. Wins have been few, losses many.
I certainly disagree with the notion “We are all essential worker.” But let’s discuss the political reality of preceding on dubious legal grounds.
You’re Rehired!
Politico reports Thousands of Fired Federal Workers Must Be Rehired Immediately.
A federal judge on Thursday ordered federal agencies to rehire tens of thousands of probationary employees who were fired amid President Donald Trump’s turbulent effort to drastically shrink the federal bureaucracy.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup described the mass firings as a “sham” strategy by the government’s central human resources office to sidestep legal requirements for reducing the federal workforce.
And even if it is upheld on appeal, it does not guarantee that all the workers will be able to get their jobs back permanently: Alsup made clear that agencies still have the authority to implement “reductions in force,” as long as they follow the proper procedures for doing so. Federal agencies are currently finalizing “reduction in force” plans.
Alsup issued his ruling in a lawsuit brought by federal employee unions. He lashed out at the Justice Department over its handling of the case, saying he believes that Trump administration lawyers were hiding the facts about who directed the mass firings.
“You will not bring the people in here to be cross-examined. You’re afraid to do so because you know cross examination would reveal the truth,” the judge said to a DOJ attorney during a hearing Thursday. “I tend to doubt that you’re telling me the truth. … I’m tired of seeing you stonewall on trying to get at the truth.”
Alsup also said the administration attempted to circumvent federal laws on reducing the workforce by attributing the firings to “performance” when that was not in fact the case. The judge called the move “a gimmick.”
“It is sad, a sad day when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance when they know good and well that’s a lie,” Alsup said.
More than 5,000 probationary workers for USDA had already won a reprieve last week when the chair of a federal civil service board ordered them reinstated for 45 days. But Alsup is the first federal judge to order the administration to broadly unwind the firing spree that has roiled the federal workforce during Trump’s first two months in office.
“The words that I give you today should not be taken that some wild-and-crazy judge in San Francisco said that an administration cannot engage in a reduction in force,” Alsup said. “It can be done, if it’s done in accordance with the law.”
Alsup is also seeking answers about the administration’s position that fired federal workers should have to seek relief from two executive branch agencies tasked with supervising federal workplace issues: the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Federal Labor Relations Authority. The judge expressed concern that Trump’s effort to remove members of those boards might render them ineffective.
The San Francisco Chronicle reported “Protesters hold signs during a national day of action against Trump administration’s mass firing of National Park Service employees at Yosemite National Park on March 1, 2025.”
Another Ill-Advised Self-Inflected Mess
The judge’s ruling is correct.
Before anyone gets into a Trumpian Tantrum over the obvious, I support workforce reduction, provided it’s done in accordance with the law.
But time and time again, Trump has issued illegal Executive Orders whose only purpose is to put Trump above the law.
And time and time again, Trump has lost in court, and I have cheered.
Q: Why cheer?
A: Unlike others, I am not a hypocrite.
All I want Trump to do is follow the law. However, Trump wants to be King, not President. Sorry!
On February 6, I commented USAID Cancellation by Trump, the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Details
The Right Approach
What Trump should have done is allow Musk to search for questionable items and report them.
Then Trump could legitimately block those items. Also he could have directed USAID to look at and question every expense, flagging and temporarily those that are questionable.
Instead, Trump blocked everything except for “critical items” whatever that means.
Lawsuits are pending and Trump will lose. We should not be in this setup.
“The unfortunate impact might very well be the courts block everything when some very good things may have happened if Trump took a legitimate case-by-case look.“
The Elon Musk Sponsored, Ted Mack Legal Amateur Hour
On February 9, I discussed The Elon Musk Sponsored, Ted Mack Legal Amateur Hour
The problem with the DOGE approach is the mission may backfire spectacularly.
What to Expect from a USAID Shutdown
- My constitutional law expert says “Contractors will sue. There will have been no valid legal basis for stopping contract payments. So, under the contracts, the federal government will pay a bundle in penalties and equitable adjustments.“
- The courts will force a reversal. And no good will come from this approach.
This is the Elon Musk sponsored, Ted Mack Legal Amateur Hour.
Correct Call
Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Pause on USAID Payouts
On March 5, I noted Supreme Court Rejects Trump’s Pause on USAID Payouts
Cancellation or Timing?
The Supreme Court’s Wednesday order was brief, but it stressed that the case was still in preliminary stages and that the government wasn’t contesting the order by Judge Ali to pay the contractors, only the timeline he set for doing so.
So, team Trump is no longer even arguing USAID would be shut down. Fancy that after Musk’s hype about shutting it down.
Rather, Trump now just wants to approve the timeline at which payments go out, but it wants too long to decide.
This court smackdown is a good thing. I don’t want Trump running roughshod over the Constitution any more than I did Biden. Hypocrites, of course, don’t see it that way.
Addendum to March 5 Post
Email Exchange With Constitutional Expert Friend (CEF) on USAID
CEF: Remember, this is not a final ruling. The case came up on an appeal from a TRO, so the question is whether the Government must continue to pay while the parties litigate the question whether the President has authority to stop payments.
The majority wrote a very brief opinion, per curiam (no one designated as author) and did not really discuss the issues. It’s three paragraphs and pretty much says that the Government did not carry its burden on the application.
Me: But Trump did not even try to claim they can cancel all aid. That was the position of Trump and Musk in the beginning. If they cannot win on this point, how are they going to win on cancellation?
CEF: Today’s win was procedural. I.e., the standards for injunctive relief were met and pending a final decision, payments can continue. But one of the standards for an injunction is that the party seeking the injunction is LIKELY TO SUCCEED ON THE MERITS. Five members so the Court apparently have decided that the applicants are likely to succeed, so that means they are likely to make Trump a loser. If you can’t prevent the distribution of Congressionally approved funds, you certainly can’t shut down an agency that Congress has mandated, if that’s what you mean by cancellation.
Me: “If you can’t prevent the distribution of Congressionally approved funds, you certainly can’t shut down an agency that Congress has mandated, if that’s what you mean by cancellation.” Yes, exactly what I mean.
Me: “If you can’t prevent the distribution of Congressionally approved funds, you certainly can’t shut down an agency that Congress has mandated, if that’s what you mean by cancellation.” Yes, exactly what I mean.
CEF: All Trump has to do is go to the Republican-controlled Congress and get it to repeal the USAID statute. A President can’t do that. Or at least not assuming we’re still living in a country governed by the US Constitution.
CEF graduated top of Harvard Law Review and has argued many cases before the Supreme court.
Conversation With CEF Today
CEF: This case is a bit trickier, but there’s a decent (more than 50%) chance it will be upheld. By the way, I know judge Alsup. I worked with him when we were both young lawyers.
Me: What’s stupid is firing park workers. You should see the lines at Zion and Arches.
Trails would have to be closed. People would be angry as hell. This judge did Trump a favor.
CEF: The reason I say only 50% is because it depends on the circumstances of each firing. Take your case of the park workers. If Congress has appropriated funds specifically for the payment of park workers, the odds are very high that the order is upheld. If, on the other hand, Congress has merely granted a fund for the Park service and given the administration discretion for the use of the money, the case becomes more complicated. And you then go to a second level of argument that looks at the terms on which the park workers were hired. Judge Allsup said that the rationale on which they were fired was a “sham.” I’ve not read the opinion, but this suggests that the workers could not be fired unless certain terms were met and Trump’s lawyers made up reasons for the formal dismissal notice that facially complied with the requirements, but had no basis in fact. I’ll go find the actual opinion and give you a rundown.
Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Executive Order
I have discussed Trump’s ridiculous executive order ending birthright citizenship many times.
My most recent synopsis was February 20, 2025 in Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Executive Order
Trump’s case on birthright citizenship is so weak that the Supreme Court might not even take it.
DOGE Makes Huge Mistake Firing Nuclear Workers, Now Seeks to Rehire Them
On February 17, I commented DOGE Makes Huge Mistake Firing Nuclear Workers, Now Seeks to Rehire Them
When you fire people without understanding what they even do, you make big mistakes.
What a Total Clown Show
Q: How did this happen?
A: Trump surrounded himself with complete legal idiots on DOGE, on firings, and on birthright citizenship.
To work in the Trump administration, a requirement going in was that one had to believe every idiotic thing Trump believed on tariffs, on the economy, and on all legal matters.
When you surround yourself with economic and legal fools, this is what happens.
Q: What do we call this?
A: Winning, silly.
Q: Why?
A: Everything Trump does is winning by definition. Contradictions cannot exit.
For a discussion of tariff contradictions, please see Lutnick Says Tariffs Can Eliminate the IRS and Balance the Budget
The stupid thing about these firings is all Trump had to do was get Congress to go along. Congress would not have agreed to all of the cuts Trump wants, but it would have agreed with some of them.
But Trump does not want to be President, he wants to be King. The courts wisely said no.
Everyone should applaud because the next President may very well want to be a Democrat King.