The U.S. Supreme Court’s July 8 decision to clear the way for the Trump Administration to proceed with its slash-and-burn policy of laying off tens of thousands of federal workers and downsizing departments and agencies likely will have significant impacts on nearly two dozen entities — including the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health.
According to Reuters, the Court’s ruling “stemmed from an executive order [President Donald] Trump issued in February ordering agencies to prepare for mass layoffs. At Trump’s direction, the administration has come up with plans to reduce staff at the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, State, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, and more than a dozen other agencies. … [The decision] lifted San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge Susan Illston’s order in May that temporarily blocked large-scale federal layoffs.”
Of the nine Supreme Court justices, only Justice Ketanji Brown dissented, noting in a 15-page opinion that “while Presidents possess some discretion to reduce federal employment, they may not fundamentally restructure the Federal Government all on their own. Administrative agencies are created by statute and funded by Congress; therefore, Presidents have traditionally worked with Congress to effect significant alterations of those statutory structures.”
The Supreme Court’s order is, technically, only temporary and meant to be a guide to proceed amid related legal challenges. Justices concluded the “the Government is likely to succeed on its argument” that plans to downsize the government are legal.
“In my view, this decision is not only truly unfortunate but also hubristic and senseless,” Brown wrote. “Lower court judges have their fingers on the pulse of what is happening on the ground and are indisputably best positioned to determine the relevant facts — including those that underlie fair assessments of the merits, harms, and equities. I see no basis to conclude that the District Court erred — let alone clearly so — in finding that the President is attempting to fundamentally restructure the Federal Government. Therefore, I would not disrupt the lower courts’ preservation of the status quo.”
The Supreme Court took on the case, at the Trump Administration’s request, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit refused to lift Illston’s injunction. That lower court determined that Trump’s executive order “far exceeds” his supervisory powers under the Constitution.
From Day One of his second term, Trump has made cutting costs by dismantling federal entities and their staffs a top priority. He created the Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, to crumble key assistance agencies like the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
As CBSNews.com reports, “In response to Mr. Trump’s executive order, labor unions, nonprofit groups, and local governments sued nearly every federal agency to block the layoffs, arguing that the executive order exceeded the president’s authority and violated the separation of powers. … A federal judge in San Francisco agreed to issue a temporary restraining order that prevented the Trump administration from moving forward with its existing reductions-in-force or planning any future layoffs as directed by Mr. Trump. The order also bars administration officials from enforcing any further orders by DOGE to cut programs or staff in connection to the president’s executive order.”
Illston then announced a longer-term block in May, citing an urgent threat to critical government-provided services.
According to USA Today, a senior White House official said the Administration “expect[s] to be sued over individual agency layoff plans, which the Supreme Court decision did not address, but the administration expects to win those lawsuits.”
On April 1, HHS officials announced the department would begin the process of laying off 10,000 employees on top of another 10,000 who left voluntarily — including those at the NIH. Employee buyouts and early retirement incentives are part of the process across multiple departments.
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.