“`html
Federal Judge Reverses Hundreds of Firings Stemming from Government Shutdown
A federal judge in San Francisco has ordered the reinstatement of hundreds of federal employees who were terminated during the recent government shutdown, siding with unions who argued the layoffs violated a congressional spending bill.
A preliminary injunction, signed Wednesday by Judge Susan Illston of the U.S.district Court for the Northern District of California, directs the Departments of Education and State, as well as the Small Business Administration (SBA) and the General Services Administration (GSA), to rescind reduction in force (RIF) notices issued to employees terminated between October 1 and November 12 – encompassing the start and end dates of the shutdown. the judge is giving agencies until December 23 to comply with the order,”absent a contrary ruling from a higher court.”
“Defendants must do what the continuing resolution says,” Illston wrote in the injunction. “They may not take any further steps to implement or carry out a RIF through January 30, 2026, irrespective of when the RIF notice first issued.”
The legal challenge stemmed from RIFs initiated despite a continuing resolution passed by Congress on November 12, which explicitly prohibited federal funds from being used to implement reductions in force between November 12, 2025, and January 30, 2026, and invalidated any RIFs proposed or initiated between October 1, 2025, and the date of enactment. The scope of the resolution expands that scope significantly.
The continuing resolution, passed by Congress on November 12, explicitly states that “no federal funds may be used to initiate, carry out, implement, or otherwise notice a reduction in force to reduce the number of employees within any department” between November 12, 2025, and January 30, 2026. It further stipulates that any RIF proposed,noticed,or initiated between October 1,2025,and the date of enactment is without effect.
During a hearing,illston explained her decision,citing the “chaotic nature of these RIFs” as a key factor. “The continuing resolution, ending the longest shutdown the government has experienced to date, said that no federal funds would be spent RIF-ing people through Jan. 30. But that is not what is happening in some of these agencies,” she stated.
The judge’s order is expected to impact approximately 680 federal employees, including nearly 250 Foreign service officers at the State Department, 200 employees at GSA, 150 at the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, and nearly 80 at SBA.
The Justice Department has indicated it may request a delay in the injunction’s implementation to allow the administration time to consider an appeal to a federal appeals court. Illston acknowledged this possibility, stating a brief delay could minimize the “whiplash” experienced by employees who have been reinstated and then faced renewed layoff threats in other cases. “They’d have to send a notice, and then another notice, and a notice saying, ‘Forget what we said yesterday.’ It would be terrible,” she said.
A Department of Justice attorney representing the administration argued that rescinding the layoffs would present “logistical” challenges, particularly if the courts ultimately allow the RIFs to proceed. “If a RIF is rescinded…government agencies would presumably have to start all over again with that process, and it would be awfully hard to unscramble that egg,” the attorney stated. He further suggested that affected employees pursue individual cases before the merit Systems Protection Board.
However, an attorney representing the plaintiff unions countered that Congress’s mandate was “clear” and that agencies should “nullify those RIFs.” She emphasized the harm faced by recently separated employees, including eviction notices and unpaid bills. “We have seen agencies exploit their lack of communication to keep employees in the dark…There absolutely has been harm,” she said.
AFGE National President Everett Kelley hailed Illston’s ruling as “another victory for federal employees and for the rule of law.” He criticized the administration’s actions as part of a “troubling pattern of egregious actions against federal employees and the American public.”
John Dinkelman,president of AFSA,echoed this sentiment,stating that Congress had clearly prohibited reductions in force and that the administration’s attempts to proceed with RIFs were “unlawful.” “Today’s ruling confirms this,” dinkelman said. “We will continue to fight to ensure that Foreign Service professionals are treated with the respect the law demands.”