Judge Stops Trump Administration from Firing Federal Probationary Workers

A federal judge has delivered a significant blow to the Trump administration’s plans to dismiss federal probationary workers. On Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge James Bredar issued an order blocking the terminations across 19 states and Washington, D.C.

The ruling, which targets 18 federal agencies, requires these agencies to “undo” the terminations of thousands of probationary workers by Tuesday, April 8. However, the protection only applies to states whose attorneys general were involved in filing the case. The states affected include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin, as well as Washington, D.C.

While this move is yet another judicial hurdle for Trump’s policy agenda, it is not a nationwide injunction like those seen in other cases. Still, it sends a clear signal: federal courts are not pulling their punches when it comes to blocking actions they find legally questionable.

Judge Bredar's ruling comes amidst a growing trend of courts stepping in to rein in Trump administration initiatives. Since taking office, President Trump has faced at least 15 nationwide injunctions, a number far surpassing those issued during the entire presidencies of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden.

Criticism of this legal pushback has not been quiet. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich labeled the wave of judicial actions as a “judicial coup d'état” during his testimony before a House Judiciary subcommittee earlier this week. He argued that the majority of judges issuing these injunctions have been appointed by Democrats, implying a political bias in their rulings.

Gingrich went further, noting that the sheer volume of injunctions coming from judges with similar ideological leanings is, in his view, no coincidence. “This is a clear effort to stop the scale of change that President Trump represents,” he stated emphatically.

Despite these criticisms, polling suggests that many Americans are skeptical of the power of individual district judges to issue nationwide injunctions. In a political climate already rife with polarization, the debate over judicial authority and its limits continues to simmer.