A U.S. judge on Thursday ordered six federal agencies to reinstate thousands of probationary employees who were dismissed as part of former President Donald Trump’s sweeping efforts to shrink the federal workforce.
The ruling marks another judicial setback for the administration, following a series of legal challenges to its aggressive policy agenda.
Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco ruled that the administration’s justification of “poor performance” for the mass terminations was “a sham in order to try to avoid statutory requirements,” according to The New York Times.
The lawsuit, brought by federal employee unions, targeted the Departments of Treasury, Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Defense, Energy, and Interior. Alsup’s ruling requires these agencies to reinstate probationary workers who were improperly dismissed.
“It is a sad day when our government fires good employees under the pretense of poor performance, knowing full well that’s a lie,” Alsup said during the hearing.
Since returning to office in January, Trump has aggressively pursued efforts to downsize government operations, slashing spending programs and laying off tens of thousands of federal employees.
The White House swiftly condemned the ruling, with Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt calling it “absurd and unconstitutional.”
“The President has the authority to exercise the power of the entire executive branch—singular district court judges cannot abuse their authority to obstruct the President’s agenda,” Leavitt said.
“If a federal district court judge wants executive powers, they can run for President themselves.”
The statement echoes previous White House criticisms of court rulings that have blocked administration policies, framing the judiciary as an impediment to executive authority.
Thursday’s decision follows an earlier ruling from the same court last month, which forced the federal government to reverse directives that had led to widespread layoffs.
While Alsup acknowledged that the government has the legal right to reduce staffing, he emphasized that such actions must follow proper legal procedures. He pointed to “reduction in force” orders issued by certain agencies as valid mechanisms for downsizing but ruled that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) had overstepped its authority.
“If it’s done right, there can be a reduction in force within an agency,” Alsup said. “Congress itself has said you can have an agency do a reduction in force—if it’s done correctly under the law.”
However, the judge found that OPM’s actions did not meet that standard. The Justice Department argued that OPM had only provided guidance, not issued formal orders, but court records revealed that officials from multiple agencies, including the IRS, the Department of Defense, and Veterans Affairs, claimed the directive to cut probationary workers had come directly from OPM.
Trump’s broader plan to reshape the federal government has been backed by high-profile allies, including billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, who has publicly supported the administration’s goal of making government “leaner and more efficient.” Critics, however, argue that these efforts are an attempt to weaken essential public services.
The latest round of cuts comes as the Education Department announced plans this week to slash its workforce by half.
Despite legal challenges, Trump faces little resistance from Washington’s political establishment. The Democratic Party remains fractured after its recent electoral losses, while Republicans, controlling both chambers of Congress, are working swiftly to codify his agenda into law.