Trump Administration Must Disclose Federal Layoff Records (1)

The Trump administration must disclose records on federal workforce cuts for judicial review, an appeals court ruled.

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said Friday that the administration must comply with a broad discovery request issued by a lower court in early July. The request, from Judge Susan Illston of the US District Court for the Northern District of California, seeks detailed records about the layoffs the government has conducted since President Donald Trump took office Jan. 20, as well as broader reorganization plans.

The ruling could ultimately force the Trump administration to reveal closely held plans to slash the federal workforce. The appeals judges didn’t rule whether those would be made public or handed over to the court for a closed-door review.

The Trump administration had appealed Illston’s order, saying it would prompt the release of “voluminous privileged documents,” including planning documents created at Trump’s request and debated at the highest levels of government. The most sensitive records will likely be blocked from public release.

Judge William Fletcher, writing for the majority, said Friday that the Trump administration did not make a compelling case for keeping the records sealed, nor did it prove the lower court erred in ordering the documents to be disclosed. The three-judge panel—comprised of two Clinton appointees and one George W. Bush appointee—did not weigh in on the broader legal challenge to Trump’s firings.

The appeals court punted the case back to the lower court, giving it the chance to weigh new legal developments. That will also “allow the district court to assess this suit in light of government actions since the issuance of the now-stayed injunction in continuing to dismiss and threaten dismissal of employees,” Fletcher wrote.

Illston recently told the Ninth Circuit that the government had provided different accountings of layoffs to different courts, underscoring the need for disclosure.

Judge Sandra Ikuta, the Bush appointee, dissented, arguing that the district court hadn’t weighed separation-of-powers issues. The layoff plans are deliberative documents that should be protected from disclosure, she said.

The cases are AFGE v. Trump, 9th Cir., 25-4476 and AFGE, AFL-CIO v. Trump, 9th Cir., No. 25-3293.