By Molly Claire Goddard
4:11am PDT, Jun 3, 2025
_
The courts are halting another bold action by
Donald Trump.
On Friday, May 30, a San Francisco-based U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals paused the current president and former Department of Government Efficiency head
Elon Musk's attempt to cut thousands of federal jobs.
Keep reading to learn why the legal authority stopped the mass firings…MORE:
Follow Wonderwall on MSN for more top news
_
In a 2-1 opinion, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judges stopped Donald Trump's February 13th executive order demanding "large-scale reductions in force" to many government agencies.
"The Executive Order at issue here far exceeds the President's supervisory powers under the Constitution," Circuit Judge William Fletcher wrote in the opinion. "The President enjoys significant removal power with respect to the appointed officers of federal agencies. But even that power is not unlimited."
_
Despite the majority of the court ruling to halt the action, Circuit Judge Consuelo Maria Callahan issued a dissenting opinion that claimed plaintiffs were "bypassing the comprehensive administrative scheme that Congress has enacted to handle federal sector labor and employment disputes."
"The district court nevertheless entertained Plaintiffs' claims and concluded that the Executive's actions likely violate separation of powers — without making any finding that any agency's RIF is likely to violate any statute," she wrote. "The court then entered a sweeping preliminary injunction that strips the Executive of control over its own personnel."
_
Donald Trump and his administration previously requested the
Supreme Court rule on the matter of the federal workforce restructuring initiated by the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget. The highest legal authority has not taken up the case.
On May 9, U.S. District Judge
Susan Illston of San Francisco issued a 14-day restraining order claiming the Trump administration issued the firings "without congressional authorization." On May 22, the preliminary injunction was extended.
"The Court here is not considering the potential loss of income of one individual employee, but the
widespread termination of salaries and benefits for individuals, families and communities," she wrote in the legal document.
_
Donald Trump and the White House were outraged by the ruling and claimed the judiciary was overreaching in their power.
"A single judge is attempting to unconstitutionally seize the power of hiring and firing from the Executive Branch," spokesman Harrison Fields said in a statement in May. "The President has the authority to exercise the power of the entire executive branch — singular district court judges cannot abuse the power of the entire judiciary to thwart the President's agenda."
