Trump Lawyers Ask Supreme Court to Undo Firing Freeze (1)

President Donald Trump’s attorneys urged the US Supreme Court to allow him to resume firing federal workers while a broader legal challenge moves forward.

The Trump administration filed an emergency petition Monday asking the high court to pause a preliminary injunction put in place by a lower California judge. The hold from Judge Susan Illston of the US District Court for the Northern District of California has prevented the administration from firing thousands of workers under Trump’s government reorganization plan.

Trump’s request marks an escalation of the legal battle over deep cuts to the federal government sought by the Department of Government Efficiency. Department of Justice attorneys have said the court freeze halted 40 planned layoffs across 17 agencies, affecting thousands of workers.

Trump’s attorneys said in the filing that the layoffs are “indisputably permitted” under federal law and cannot be challenged, in part because the plans have not been finalized. They said Trump’s Feb. 11 executive order only instructed agencies to create a framework for layoffs—it doesn’t direct specific cut.

The administration also used the request to further a challenge to nationwide injunctions, criticizing the “indefensible scope” of Illston’s order. Any injunction should be limited to a specific plaintiff, Trump’s lawyers said. They also argued that the dispute should be settled by the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Federal Labor Relations Authority, not the courts.

The underlying lawsuit, led by federal workers’ unions, is the most direct and far-reaching challenge to Trump’s efforts to downsize the government. Trump has sought to erase sections of the government without approval from Congress.

Groups representing government workers argued the moves violate separation of powers. In granting the preliminary injunction, Illston cited nine past presidents from both parties who have sought approval from Congress to reorganize parts of the executive branch.

The cases are AFGE v. Trump, N.D. Cal., 3:25-cv-03698and AFGE, AFL-CIO, et al v. Trump, et al, C.C.N.D. Cal., 25-3293.