A federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order that completely blocks the Trump administration from firing thousands of federal workers during the ongoing government shutdown.
U.S. District Judge Susan Yvonne Illston, presiding over the Northern District of California, didn’t mince words. She declared that the administration’s action was “illegal, in excess of authority and arbitrary and capricious.” This ruling is huge news for over 4,000 federal employees who had already received reduction-in-force (RIF) notices—a process that essentially means they are being laid off.
The judge’s decision came after two major labor unions sued to stop the firings, arguing that using a government shutdown as an opportunity to “clean house” was not only cruel but also totally unlawful. This is the same president who has refused to provide backpay to furloughed workers. It seems the administration believed the funding lapse meant they could rewrite the rules, but Judge Illston was quick to shut that down. Per NBC, the judge emphasized, “You can’t do this in a nation of laws.”
This entire ordeal has become a classic example of political gamesmanship, but thankfully, the courts are stepping in to protect the civil servants who keep our government running. However, some factions within the MAGA movement appear to be using this situation to push their agenda, ignoring legal boundaries. It’s clear: Trump can’t break every law he wants.
The shutdown has now dragged on for two weeks, leaving hundreds of thousands of federal workers furloughed and without pay. On top of this financial strain, the administration decided it was the “perfect time” to issue RIF notices to a massive portion of its workforce.
We’re talking about at least 4,000 workers initially, with the White House’s own budget director, Russ Vought, suggesting that the total number of job cuts could exceed 10,000. That’s a staggering figure, and it’s easy to imagine the chaos and anxiety this has caused among federal employees.
Judge Illston made it crystal clear that this entire strategy was fundamentally flawed, calling it “very much ready, fire, aim on most of these programs,” and emphasizing that it carries a severe human cost. She added that this kind of human cost “cannot be tolerated.”
The RIF process is supposed to be thorough, requiring measures such as 60 days’ advance notice and consideration of a worker’s veteran status and length of service. Instead, the administration appeared to view the shutdown as an opportunity—or an excuse—to push through massive, pre-planned cuts to the federal government as part of a wider agenda. Critics even described this approach as “straight out of Project 2025’s playbook.”
To be fair, the government’s legal team tried to defend their position, but it was a tough sell in court. Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth Themins Hedges argued that losing employment did not constitute “irreparable harm” because any employment-related losses were “reparable.” Basically, she said, “Yes, they lost their jobs, but they could eventually receive back pay or find other employment, so it’s not a significant issue.”
Judge Illston, however, was not convinced. In a particularly powerful exchange, Hedges even admitted she was not prepared to discuss the merits of the case—that is, whether the layoffs themselves were actually legal. The judge’s response was pointed: “This hatchet is falling on the heads of employees all across the nation, and you’re not even prepared to address whether that’s legal?”
The ruling stands as a significant affirmation of workers’ rights amid a politically charged shutdown and highlights the judiciary’s critical role in upholding the rule of law and protecting federal employees from unlawful administrative actions.
https://wegotthiscovered.com/politics/federal-judge-just-slapped-down-donald-trumps-attempt-to-break-the-law-called-it-illegal-in-excess-of-authority/