OPM asks Supreme Court to halt probationary employee reinstatement at six agencies

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Monday to halt a district court ruling that ordered the reinstatement of fired probationary workers at six federal agencies.

In the emergency application — filed by the Justice Department on behalf of the Office of Personnel Management — the government argues that the organizations that brought the lawsuit lack standing, the district lacked the authority to hear the claims, and that ordering reinstatement was an unlawful remedy.

The preliminary injunction by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California “let third parties hijack the employment relationship between the federal government and its workforce,” acting Solicitor General Sarah M. Harris wrote in the application.

Harris said the preliminary injunction, which ordered the reinstatement of over 16,000 fired workers at six agencies, violated the separation of powers “like many other recent orders.” 

“That is no way to run a government. This Court should stop the ongoing assault on the constitutional structure before further damage is wrought,” Harris said.

The government’s request is the latest in a series of cases challenging the Trump administration’s efforts to reduce the size of the federal government by firing probationary employees, who are workers in a trial period of one to two years after being hired or promoted. Most of those firings cited “performance” as the reason, which workers and their advocates have pushed back against. At least two federal courts have issued orders to reinstate those workers. 

In the Northern District of California, Judge William Alsup sided with workers’ unions, concluding that OPM likely unlawfully ordered other federal agencies to fire employees. Alsup’s order covers the Departments of Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Energy, Interior, Treasury and Defense to reinstate their fired probationers. 

Meanwhile in the District of Maryland, Judge James K. Bredar sided with a coalition of multiple states that argued the firings violated federal statute governing reductions in force, or RIFs. 

Bredar’s order covers the same agencies as the Northern District of California ruling except for DOD. It also covers the Departments of Commerce, Education, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Transportation, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, General Services Administration, Small Business Administration, and U.S. Agency for International Development. 

While the Trump administration has told the courts it’s working on complying with those rulings, it also attempted to halt the orders with their respective circuit courts. Those requests, however, were both unsuccessful.

Prior to the emergency application on the Northern District of California order, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied the government’s request for similar relief. In a decision last week, two of the three judges on the panel of that court concluded that staying the injunction would “disrupt the status quo and turn it on its head.” 

The Fourth Circuit similarly denied the government’s request to stay the District of Maryland ruling Friday.