President Donald Trump’s executive orders were hit with another round of legal blocks this week, on everything from firing federal workers to Social Security data.
Newsweek sought email comment from the Department of Government Efficiency and the Justice Department on Friday.
Why It Matters
Trump issued a flurry of executive orders after his inauguration in January. The constitutionality of his actions are now being tested in the federal courts.
What To Know
Legal setbacks Trump suffered this week include:
Firing Federal Workers
On April 1, a Maryland judge ordered federal agencies to reinstate thousands of probationary workers.
U.S. Judge James Bredar issued the preliminary injunction ordering 20 federal departments and agencies to rehire the thousands of employees, who were still working their probationary period, but only in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.
That is bad news for Trump, as his mass firings will now mostly be concentrated in Republican states, with a potential backlash from Republican voters.
Social Security Data
On April 1, an appeal court blocked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from obtaining sensitive Social Security data.
DOGE, and its director, Elon Musk, had hoped to use the information to make major cuts to the Social Security system.
On March 20, Maryland federal judge Ellen Hollander imposed a temporary restraining order on DOGE to prevent it from obtaining Social Security Administration (SSA) information on millions of Americans.
The case was taken by the Alliance for Retired Americans, the American Federation of Teachers and other representative groups.
DOGE then challenged her temporary restraining order to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals.
On April 1, the appeal court ruled that it does not have jurisdiction over the case. That’s because temporary restraining orders cannot be appealed. An appeal is generally only allowed once the temporary restraining order is converted to a longer lasting preliminary injunction.
Trans Military Members
On March 31, a federal appeals court in San Francisco, California, refused to lift a block a Trump order that banned trans people from the U.S. military.
Benjamin Settle, a federal judge in Tacoma, Washington, had issued a preliminary injunction against Trump’s order.
Trump administration lawyers filed an appeal to the 9th Circuit, in which they had argued that without a stay, “the military will be forced to continue implementing a policy that the Department has determined is not compatible with military readiness and lethality.”
On March 31, the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to place a stay on Settle’s order while the Trump administration launched a full appeal.
What People Are Saying
Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, two civil rights groups which took the challenge against the military trans ban, said in a joint statement that they would fight the Trump appeal “on behalf of transgender service members who serve our country selflessly and with distinction and honor.”
Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, welcomed Hollander’s temporary restraining order that prevented the release of social security data.
“Seniors must be able to trust the Social Security Administration will protect their personal information and keep it from falling into the wrong hands,” he said in a statement.
What Happens Next
The Justice Department will likely appeal Bredar’s preliminary injunction on probationary workers.
Hollander is expected to issue a preliminary injunction on the social security data and the Trump administration will appeal once more.
The administration’s appeal on the military trans ban will continue in San Francisco, but all fired trans military personnel will be reinstated while the appeal continues.
Read the full article here
