A federal judge on Thursday ordered six federal agencies to rehire thousands of workers with probationary status who had been fired as part of President Trump’s government-gutting initiative.
Ruling from the bench, Judge William H. Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California went further than a previous ruling. He found that the Trump administration’s firing of probationary workers had essentially been done unlawfully by fiat from the Office of Personnel Management, the government’s human resources arm. Only agencies themselves have broad hiring and firing powers, he said.
He directed the Treasury and the Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Defense, Energy and Interior Departments to comply with his order and offer to reinstate any probationary employees who were improperly terminated. But he added that he was open to expanding his decision later to apply to other agencies where the extent of harms had not been as fully documented yet.
His order stemmed from a lawsuit brought by federal employee unions that challenged the legality of how those agencies went about firing probationary workers en masse. The unions argued that those workers were swept up in a larger effort by Mr. Trump and his top adviser, Elon Musk, to arbitrarily ravage the federal government and demoralize its employees.
Judge Alsup said he was convinced that federal agencies followed a directive from senior officials in the Office of Personnel Management to use a loophole allowing them to fire probationary workers by citing poor performance, regardless of their actual conduct on the job. He concluded that the government’s actions were a “gimmick” intended to expeditiously carry out mass firings.
“It is 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,” he said.
“It was a sham in order to try to avoid statutory requirements,” he added.
He also extended his restraining order issued last month blocking the Office of Personnel Management from orchestrating further mass firings. But before handing down his ruling on Thursday, Judge Alsup was careful to make sure the lawyers representing the unions understood its limits.
Agencies planning to conduct large-scale layoffs, known as a “reduction in force,” can still proceed in accordance with the laws that govern such processes — meaning that the reprieve for workers may only be temporary. The Office of Personnel Management had set a deadline of Thursday for agencies to submit reduction in force plans.
“If it’s done right, there can be a reduction in force within an agency, that has to be true,” Judge Alsup said.
Hours later, the unions filed a motion seeking to extend the order to cover 16 federal agencies. The government also appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
As the Trump administration continues to contest the judge’s order, a substantial portion of the hearing on Thursday also focused on the ways the government has moved to circumvent the courts and sideline workers by any means available.
In other cases focused on the administration’s suspension of federal contracts and grants, judges have similarly fretted that agencies have forged ahead to terminate those programs faster than courts could order the funding unfrozen.
Danielle Leonard, a lawyer representing the unions, said that even after an independent agency that protects government workers in employment disputes ordered the Agriculture Department to reinstate 6,000 probationary workers this month, the agency had kept many on paid leave, restoring their salaries but not their jobs.
“We do not believe that they are going to return any of these employees to actual service,” she said.
In a statement on Tuesday, the Agriculture Department said it was working on a “phased plan for return to duty” for those workers.
Judge Alsup had originally planned to have Trump administration officials appear to testify on Thursday about the process through which the layoffs were planned. But the government made clear on Wednesday that Charles Ezell, the acting head of the Office of Personnel Management, would not appear.
Mr. Ezell became a central character in the lawsuit because of memos and meetings he held with agency heads in February that included detailed guidance on how to conduct the mass layoffs of probationary workers. Lawyers representing the federal workers’ unions that sued called the Mr. Ezell’s guidance “insidious” and clearly devised to enlist Mr. Trump’s appointees into a broader effort to decimate the federal work force.
Judge Alsup said he had hoped testimony from the officials involved in the firings would provide clarity about the conception and execution of those plans. He also excoriated a lawyer from the Justice Department for failing to produce him and other potential witnesses.
As part of his ruling on Thursday, Judge Alsup specified that the government must allow Noah Peters, a lawyer working with Mr. Musk’s team who was detailed to the personnel office, to be deposed in Washington about the impetus behind the firings.
“You will not bring the people in here to be cross-examined,” he said. “You’re afraid to do so, because you know cross-examination would reveal the truth.”
Kelsey Helland, the lawyer present from the Justice Department, said the government had submitted ample evidence that agencies were acting on their own and were never beholden to orders from Mr. Ezell.
On Wednesday, the government filed news releases from a variety of agencies. They included language indicating that the appointed leaders of those agencies made the decisions to shrink their work forces independently and in line with Mr. Trump’s political agenda — not based on any directive from the Office of Personnel Management.
“These were the actions of the political leadership of these agencies in response to a priority, a clearly communicated public priority of the administration, rather than an order from O.P.M.,” Mr. Helland said.
Mr. Helland added that it was not unusual for the Trump administration to try to shield its top officials from appearing in court.
“Every presidential administration in modern history has jealously guarded their agency heads against being forced to give testimony,” he said.
But Judge Alsup grew increasingly riled by those explanations, saying he felt “misled by the U.S. government” about the way it had proceeded.
He said the Trump administration appeared determined to “decimate” agencies such as the Merit Systems Protection Board, a venue through which workers can appeal adverse personnel decisions, and the Office of Special Counsel, which used to be well positioned to assist probationary workers in this case.
All the while, Judge Alsup said, the government appeared to have obfuscated its intentions with regard to federal workers while sidestepping his orders to have top officials testify.
“It upsets me; I want you to know that,” he said.
“You’re not helping me get at the truth,” he added. “You’re giving me press releases — sham documents.”
