Content Revised for American English:
Protests Erupt Over Trump Administration’s Dismissal of Federal Workers
Protesters gather near the offices of federal lawmakers during a demonstration against a federal workforce reduction campaign led by billionaire Elon Musk, a key advisor to President Donald Trump, on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on February 25, 2025. — Reuters
WASHINGTON: In a significant turn of events, the Trump administration has acknowledged that nearly 25,000 recently hired federal employees were terminated and is now focused on their reinstatement. This acknowledgment comes after a court determined that these mass layoffs were likely illegal.
Court documents revealed that federal agencies are actively working to reinstate all affected workers following a ruling from a judge suggesting that their dismissals were probably unlawful. Filed late Monday in the federal court based in Baltimore, Maryland, the documents contained statements from officials from 18 agencies, confirming that the workers reinstated from probationary status are currently placed on administrative leave, at least temporarily.
The mass layoffs, part of Trump’s broader initiative to streamline the federal workforce, have received considerable media attention. However, these court filings mark the administration’s first comprehensive disclosure regarding the terminations.
Most agencies reported dismissing several hundred workers, with the Treasury Department laying off approximately 7,600, the Department of Agriculture about 5,700, and the Department of Health and Human Services over 3,200, as detailed in the filings.
On March 13, U.S. District Judge James Bredar ruled that the mass dismissals of probationary workers, which began last month, were unlawful and mandated their reinstatement while further legal discussions continue. Although the ruling does not prevent agencies from terminating employees in the future, it criticized how the large-scale layoffs were executed, indicating that agencies should have adhered to appropriate procedures during such significant workforce reductions.
Typically, probationary workers have served less than a year in their current roles, though some may have been long-term federal employees.
In a brief notice released on Tuesday, Judge Bredar remarked that agencies have shown "meaningful progress toward compliance" with his prior ruling. He instructed them to provide an update on their reinstatement efforts by Monday afternoon and expressed his expectations for "substantial compliance."
This ruling follows a lawsuit initiated by 19 states led by Democrats, along with Washington, D.C. They contended that the mass terminations would lead to a spike in unemployment claims and a greater demand for state-provided social services.
The Maryland Attorney General’s office, which is spearheading the lawsuit, indicated that it is currently evaluating the court’s filings.
Furthermore, the Trump administration has appealed Bredar’s ruling while requesting the Richmond, Virginia-based appeals court to suspend the order until the legal process unfolds.
Several former probationary workers from the Departments of Agriculture, Health and Human Services, the Internal Revenue Service, and the General Services Administration told Reuters that they received notifications about their reinstatement with full pay, although they are currently on administrative leave.
One reinstated worker from the General Services Administration stated he still expects to be let go eventually, but acknowledged that receiving pay and benefits for now provides some relief. "My family has health insurance, and this gives me a little time to figure out what’s next," he noted.
Federal Court Decision in San Francisco
Just hours before Judge Bredar’s March 13 ruling, a federal judge in San Francisco ordered the reinstatement of probationary workers at six agencies, including the five outlined in Bredar’s ruling as well as the U.S. Department of Defense. The administration is also challenging this decision.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup criticized the choice to place probationary employees on administrative leave instead of reinstating them to work, asserting that this approach failed to restore government services as intended.
In response, the U.S. Department of Justice contended that placing these workers on administrative leave is merely the first step toward full reinstatement and clarified that "administrative leave is not being used to bypass the requirement for reinstatement."
According to the filings submitted in Baltimore, agency officials indicated that they had either already reinstated dismissed employees or were in the process of doing so. They recognized the confusion and disruption caused by the large-scale reinstatement.
These officials cautioned that if an appellate court overturns Judge Bredar’s ruling, it could authorize agencies to terminate these workers again, leading to several changes in their employment status within a short timeframe.
"The considerable uncertainty surrounding this situation and the associated administrative burdens hinder supervisors from effectively managing their teams," stated Mark Green, Deputy Assistant Secretary at the U.S. Department of the Interior, in one of the filings. "Work schedules and responsibilities are being intricately linked to hearings and briefings set by the courts."
Judge Bredar has scheduled a hearing for March 26 to decide whether his ruling should remain effective during the ongoing lawsuit, a process that could extend for months or even longer.
This rendition maintains the essence of the original information while ensuring it is uniquely phrased and compliant with American English standards.
