The Daily Fuckup

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to step in after a federal judge blocked parts of its plan to push agencies toward large-scale reductions in force across much of the executive branch. The emergency stay application in the case was filed on May 16, 2025, and sought to pause a Northern District of California order that had temporarily restrained implementation of the executive order and a follow-up memo from the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget. ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24A1106/358981/20250516121951847_Trump_v_AFGE_Stay_Appl.pdf))

The filing told the justices the district court’s order swept too broadly by reaching personnel planning at 21 federal agencies. In the government’s view, the injunction blocked agencies from preparing for reductions in force even when those actions were supposed to be carried out consistent with existing law. The administration also argued that challenges to actual layoff decisions belong in separate review channels tied to federal employment law. ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24A1106/358981/20250516121951847_Trump_v_AFGE_Stay_Appl.pdf))

The legal fight did not end with that first emergency application. On May 30, 2025, a Ninth Circuit panel denied a stay of the district court’s order, leaving the injunction in place while the case moved forward. That denial kept the dispute in emergency mode rather than resolving it on the merits. ([cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov](https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/05/30/25-3293.pdf))

The underlying case is one of the administration’s sharper clashes over how far it can push its workforce-cutting agenda through the White House, the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management. The plaintiffs, led by federal employee unions and allied groups, say the government is trying to carry out structural changes before courts decide whether the legal authority for those moves exists. The justices have not yet publicly resolved the stay request. ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24A1106/358981/20250516121951847_Trump_v_AFGE_Stay_Appl.pdf))