Federal Judge Orders Reversal of Layoffs During Government Shutdown
In a significant ruling from San Francisco, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston has mandated the reinstatement of hundreds of federal employees who were terminated amid the recent government shutdown. This decision strikes a critical blow against previously imposed reduction in force (RIF) notices that were pushed through between October 1 and November 12, 2025, the duration of the shutdown.
Key Details of the Ruling
Judge Illston’s preliminary injunction, issued on December 17, 2025, compels various federal departments, including the Department of Education, the State Department, the Small Business Administration (SBA), and the General Services Administration (GSA), to rescind these RIF notices by December 23, 2025. Illston’s ruling is unequivocal: federal agencies are prohibited from initiating or implementing layoffs through January 30, 2026, in accordance with a stopgap spending bill enacted by Congress.
Violations of Congressional Mandates
The ruling stems from a lawsuit led by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), among other unions. These organizations asserted that the federal agencies violated provisions of the continuing resolution by not adhering to the ban on layoffs during the government shutdown.
A temporary restraining order had already been enacted earlier in the month, which halted the layoffs of nearly 250 Foreign Service officers at the State Department. Although these layoffs were originally scheduled for November 10, they have been put on indefinite hold.
Implications for Federal Employees
The impact of Judge Illston’s ruling is extensive, potentially affecting around 680 federal employees across various agencies. This includes personnel from:
- State Department: Approximately 250 Foreign Service officers
- General Services Administration: Roughly 200 employees
- Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights: About 150 employees
- Small Business Administration: Nearly 80 employees
During the court’s proceedings, Illston noted the chaotic nature surrounding these RIFs, stating, “The continuing resolution…said that no federal funds would be spent [on layoffs] through January 30. But that is not what is happening in some of these agencies."
Potential for Delay
During the hearing, attorneys from the Department of Justice expressed concern regarding the logistics of rescinding layoffs, especially if the government opts to appeal the ruling. The DOJ attorney, Brad Rosenberg, highlighted the complexities involved, suggesting that agencies might face challenges in reconsidering laid-off employees if subsequent court rulings allowed layoffs to proceed.
Legal Standpoint: A Clear Congressional Directive
Congress clearly articulated its intentions when it passed the recent continuing resolution, which explicitly prohibits any reductions in force between November 12, 2025, and January 30, 2026. The legislation states that any RIF procedures initiated within the specified timeframe shall have no legal validity.
Danielle Leonard, counsel for the unions, emphasized that the legislative mandate was clear, advocating for the immediate nullification of RIF notices to protect employee rights. She noted that many affected employees are struggling with dire circumstances, facing evictions and financial instability due to insufficient communication from their respective agencies.
Union Leaders Respond
AFGE National President Everett Kelley expressed strong approval of the ruling, describing it as a victory for federal employees and the legal framework governing federal employment. He criticized the administration for what he characterized as a blatant disregard for Congressional directives.
Likewise, John Dinkelman, president of the AFSA, affirmed Congress’s explicit ban on layoffs, condemning the Trump administration’s actions as unlawful. He vowed to continue advocating for the rights and respect due to Foreign Service professionals.
Conclusion
Judge Illston’s ruling has created a ripple effect throughout the federal employment landscape, emphasizing the importance of adhering to Congressional mandates during tumultuous periods, such as government shutdowns. This case underscores the challenge of navigating federal employment law amid shifting political priorities. The upcoming days will be crucial as agencies scramble to comply with the court’s directives, potentially reshaping the working lives of hundreds of federal workers.
For continued updates on federal employment issues, refer to the Federal News Network.
