Trump Administration asks Supreme Court to lift new block on mass layoffs

The Government of President Donald Trump on Monday filed an appeal before the U.S. Supreme Court to lift the block imposed by a federal judge on mass layoffs in the federal bureaucracy, calling the judicial decision based on an "indefensible premise" that requires Congressional authorization for such actions.

The request marks the 18th emergency appeal filed by the Administration with the high court since it took office and the second time this particular case has reached the judges.

The legal dispute centers on an injunction issued in May by District Judge Susan Illston, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, in San Francisco.

Illston's order imposes an indefinite ban on implementing large-scale staff reductions, known as Reductions in Force (RIF), across a wide range of federal agencies. The judge argued that Congress must explicitly authorize any RIFs, a position the Republican administration believes is wrong.

In his appeal, Attorney General D. John Sauer asserted that Illston's injunction "halted and delayed, maintaining a bloated and inefficient workforce while wasting countless taxpayer dollars.”

Sauer stressed that the court order hinders the Administration's efforts to reshape the federal bureaucracy, a key goal that includes significantly reducing the workforce at several agencies and dismantling others entirely, in line with the creation of the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The case stems from an executive order signed by President Trump in February, which ordered all federal agencies to prepare for a RIF. That directive triggered a lawsuit filed by a coalition of unions, advocacy groups and local governments, who argue that mass layoffs are illegal without congressional approval.

Illston's order represents the second judicial intervention in this matter, after a previous block, also appealed by the Administration, expired after two weeks when the Supreme Court declined to intervene.

The most recent appeal comes on the heels of a decision by a divided panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which last Friday rejected the administration's request to lift Illston's injunction.

The government argues that the lawsuit is premature, as many of the RIFs have not yet been finalized, and that challenges to these reductions should be directed to specialized review boards, not federal district courts.

For her part, Judge Elena Kagan, in charge of emergency matters coming from the Ninth Circuit, ordered the plaintiffs to file a response within a week. Kagan could rule on the request individually or refer it to the full Supreme Court for a vote, something that has already occurred with the Administration's emergency appeals.