Federal judge just slapped down Donald Trump’s attempt to break the law, called it ‘illegal, in excess of authority’

A federal judge just 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, working out of the Northern District of California, didn’t mince words, declaring that the administration’s action was “illegal, in excess of authority and arbitrary and capricious.”

This is huge news for over 4,000 federal employees who had already received reduction-in-force (RIF) notices, a process that basically means you’re getting laid off. The judge’s ruling came after two major labor unions sued to stop the firings, arguing that using a government shutdown to clean house was not only cruel but also totally unlawful. This is the same president who doesn’t want to give them backpay either.

It seems the administration thought the lapse in funding meant they could just rewrite the rules, but Judge Illston was quick to shut that down. Per NBC, the judge said, “You can’t do this in a nation of laws.” This whole ordeal has been a classic example of political gamesmanship, but thankfully, the courts are stepping in to protect the civil servants who keep our government running. However, MAGA seems to be using this to do whatever it wants.

Trump can’t break every law he wants

The shutdown has already dragged on for two weeks, leaving hundreds of thousands of federal workers furloughed and going without a paycheck. Now, on top of that financial strain, the administration decided it was the perfect time to issue RIF notices to a massive chunk 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 amount of job cuts could climb north of 10,000.

That’s a staggering number, and you can only imagine the kind of chaos and anxiety that’s caused. 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 it has a human cost.” She added that this kind of human cost “cannot be tolerated.”

The RIF process is supposed to be extensive, requiring things like 60 days of advance notice, and taking into account a worker’s veteran status and length of service. On the other hand, the administration saw the shutdown as an opportunity (or an excuse) to push through massive, pre-planned cuts to the federal government as part of its wider agenda, with critics calling it a move “straight out of Project 2025’s playbook.”

To be fair, the government’s legal team did try to argue their side, but it was a tough sell. Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth Themins Hedges argued in court that losing employment was not considered “irreparable harm” because any employment-related harms were “reparable.” Basically, they were saying, “Yeah, they lost their job, but we could eventually give them back pay or they could find another job, so it’s fine.”

Judge Illston, however, was not buying it for a second. In one particularly powerful exchange, Hedges even admitted she wasn’t prepared to discuss the merits of the case; in other words, 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?”