Federal judge expands order barring Trump admin from firing federal workers

A federal judge in Maryland has ordered the Trump administration to continue reinstating probationary federal employees that were fired from 20 federal agencies since the president took office earlier this year, a ruling related to a lawsuit filed by a coalition of attorneys general challenging the legality of those terminations.

In a preliminary injunction order filed late Tuesday, U.S. District Judge James K. Bredar also barred the administration from conducting future layoffs of probationary workers at the affected agencies — unless those layoffs comply with the laws regulating such an action.

Bredar’s ruling, which gives the Trump administration until April 8 to comply, mirrors a temporary restraining order against 18 federal agencies that he granted last month, though it adds the Department of Defense and the Office of Personnel Management to the list. The order covers federal probationary workers who live or work in the one of 19 states and the District of Columbia that had attorneys general that joined the lawsuit.

The ruling adds even more legal scrutiny of President Donald Trump’s sweeping efforts to streamline federal agencies and curtails the hurried approach of the U.S. DOGE Service to carry out that mission.

The judge said the federal government “probably broke the laws that regulate en masse terminations of government employees” and that not enforcing those laws through an injunction would cause ongoing harm those affected. The U.S. Justice Department on Wednesday appealed Bredar’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.

The order stems from a lawsuit filed in early March by 20 Democratic attorneys general arguing that the mass layoffs of tens of thousands of federal probationary employees since Trump’s Jan. 20 inauguration had violated federal laws and regulations that dictate the process for “reductions in force,” known as RIFs.

Under those rules, if the government terminates probationary employees en masse for reasons unrelated to performance, agencies must follow guidelines that include at least a 60-day notification to affected states so local officials can set up rapid-response teams to support a surge of unemployed residents.

But, according to the lawsuit, the Trump administration did not do that.

Maryland Attorney General Anthony G. Brown, whose state is the lead plaintiff on the lawsuit, said the judge’s preliminary injunction “ensures Maryland jobs and resources are safe while we continue this fight in court.”

“These mass layoffs forced hardworking civil servants and their families into financial insecurity, a sudden and unexpected crisis that risked overwhelming our State’s ability to help the unemployed,” Brown said in a statement. “I will not let the president threaten our communities or the livelihoods of Marylanders just so he can fulfill his misguided goal of dismantling the federal government, in the name of government efficiency.”

The other plaintiff states in the lawsuit include Minnesota, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin, as well as the District of Columbia.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday, but Justice Department officials have asserted in court papers that a forced rehiring of about 24,000 would sow chaos, particularly when an appeals court might later allow the terminations to move forward. But the administration said it was nonetheless trying to comply with judicial orders, and has documented those efforts in several status reports to the court.

Bredar said in court papers Tuesday that the 20 agencies included in his order are not barred from conducting future RIFs of probationary employees — as long as they comply with federal law, including the notification to states.

The states had asked Bredar to extend the reach of the preliminary injunction beyond their 20 jurisdictions, encompassing workers in states that did not opt to join the lawsuit, many of them Republican-led. But the judge denied that request and limited the scope to only the plaintiff states.

A broader injunction may have been appropriate, Bredar said, if the lawsuit was on behalf of the thousands of probationary employees who had been laid off.

“But that is not the case,” Bredar wrote in his decision. “Only states have sued here, and only to vindicate their interests as states.”

In the lawsuit, the Democratic attorneys general described a host of challenges onset by the mass firings, including upticks in unemployment claims that they’ve been ill-prepared to process because of the federal government’s failure to warn them.