Supreme Court Halts Order to Rehire Over 16,000 Fired Federal Probationary Workers

The Supreme Court has put a stop to a lower court order that mandated six federal agencies to reinstate over 16,000 probationary workers who had been terminated. The court granted the Trump administration's request for emergency relief, allowing it to continue its efforts to significantly reduce the size of the federal government while legal proceedings are ongoing.

Supreme Court's Ruling

In an unsigned order, the Supreme Court stated that the injunction issued by the district court in mid-March was solely based on the claims made by the nine non-profit organization plaintiffs in this case. However, the court determined that those allegations were insufficient to establish the organizations' legal standing to sue, according to established law. As a result, the stay on the lower court's order will remain in effect until the litigation is resolved.

Opposition from Justices

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the decision, expressing their disagreement with granting the Justice Department's request for relief.

Impact on Probationary Workers

The mass firings of probationary workers were an early target of President Trump's initiative to cut government size. These workers, who were still in their one or two-year trial periods, were left in limbo after receiving termination notices in mid-February. Although their employment was restored weeks later due to court orders, the uncertainty surrounding their status continued.

Legal Proceedings

The legal dispute began when a group of labor unions and non-profit organizations filed a lawsuit in federal district court in California, challenging the mass terminations of probationary workers. The lawsuit alleged that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) had directed the firings, exceeding its authority.

District Court's Ruling

In late February, U.S. District Judge William Alsup issued a temporary restraining order, deeming OPM's earlier guidance to federal agencies regarding the firing of probationary workers as "illegal" and invalid. The judge also concluded that the mass firings were likely unlawful.

Revised Guidance from OPM

Subsequent to the district court's ruling, OPM acting director Charles Ezell issued revised guidance, clarifying that it was not directing agencies to take any specific performance-based actions regarding probationary employees.

Reinstatement Orders

Following a hearing, the district judge ordered six agencies — the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs — to immediately offer reinstatement to all probationary workers who had been terminated. The human resources officials at these agencies informed the court that they had rehired the employees and placed them on administrative leave before returning them to full-duty status.

Appeal to the Supreme Court

The Justice Department sought a pause on the reinstatement order from a federal appeals court while it appealed the decision. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit declined the request. Consequently, the Justice Department filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, arguing that the district judge lacked the authority to grant reinstatement to the thousands of probationary workers.

Government's Concerns

The acting Solicitor General, Sarah Harris, contended that the injunction imposed by the district court represented a profound intrusion on the executive branch's ability to manage its internal affairs. She also highlighted the logistical burdens and financial costs associated with the reinstatements, asserting that each day the preliminary injunction remained in effect subjected the Executive Branch to judicial micromanagement.

Response from Unions and Organizations

In response, the unions and organizations challenging the firings argued that the government's claimed harms were self-inflicted. They contended that the scale of the task to reinstate the employees was a reflection of the government's unlawful actions and criticized OPM's directives as hasty and sloppy. They asserted that the government could still terminate employees as long as it complied with the law.

Separate Legal Challenge

The case brought by the unions and groups is one of two legal challenges against the mass firings of probationary workers. A separate lawsuit filed by a group of 19 states in federal district court in Maryland also argued that the terminations were unlawful. In March, a judge ordered the reinstatement of affected probationary workers at more than a dozen agencies, followed by a preliminary injunction granted in early April, which applied to probationary workers at 20 agencies in the states involved in the lawsuit.