WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday halted a federal judge’s ruling that would have forced several government agencies to reinstate roughly 16,000 workers fired by the Trump administration. The decision means the federal government won’t need to rush to bring back laid-off employees while the case continues to play out in a California court.
The unsigned ruling drew dissent from Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, two of the court’s liberal voices. The justices also hinted that some nonprofit groups behind the lawsuit might lack the legal standing to pursue their claims.
The plaintiffs, including labor advocacy groups, expressed disappointment but remained defiant. “Despite this setback, our coalition will keep fighting for these wronged workers and defending the freedoms of the American people,” they said in a joint statement.
The situation grew murkier with a parallel ruling from a Maryland judge, affecting the same agencies in the California case plus others. That decision, still in effect, keeps impacted workers in 19 states and Washington, D.C., on paid administrative leave as litigation unfolds—a notable contrast to the California order.
The agencies involved in the California case include the Departments of Veterans Affairs, Defense, Energy, Interior, Agriculture, and Treasury. The Trump administration, led by Elon Musk and his new Department of Government Efficiency, has aggressively pushed to slash federal employment, igniting a fierce legal battle.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup in California had ruled that firing probationary employees violated legal procedures, ordering their reinstatement. The Trump administration fired back, arguing Alsup overstepped his authority and meddled excessively in executive personnel decisions. Government lawyers also contended that groups like the American Federation of Government Employees, Main Street Alliance, and the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks lacked a direct stake in the firings to sue.
The Supreme Court’s ruling only addressed the nonprofits’ claims, which underpinned Alsup’s decision. Union grievances could still spark further legal action.
In court filings, then-acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris argued that Alsup’s order “violates the separation of powers,” turning a single district court into the overseer of executive staffing on shaky grounds and a rushed timeline. “That’s no way to run a government,” she said.
Harris highlighted the Maryland case as distinct, where Judge James Bredar only mandated paid leave rather than full reinstatement. The Maryland litigation remains in an early stage, while a separate Merit System Protection Board ruling has also compelled the Department of Agriculture to rehire thousands.
The challengers’ lawyers countered that the government had already claimed “substantial compliance” with the reinstatement order in another filing, weakening the urgency for Supreme Court intervention. Still, Tuesday’s ruling marks a blow to efforts to protect federal workers in this escalating legal showdown.
