WASHINGTON — A federal judge in California issued a more permanent ruling Tuesday blocking the Trump administration from laying off federal workers because of the government shutdown, saying in part those terminations were intended for “political retribution.”

Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, who is overseeing a legal challenge brought by labor groups, granted a preliminary injunction from the bench and said she would follow up with a written ruling.

The injunction is expected to last while the case is pending but could be appealed. Illston previously issued a temporary restraining order in the case to block the layoffs.

The judge found the labor groups were likely to succeed on claims that actions from Office of Personnel Management and Office of Management and Budget to in essence authorize layoffs during the shutdown violated administrative law.

She added she believes she will find their actions were “arbitrary and capricious,” saying the layoffs were intended for political retribution and there was a haphazard rollout to the terminations.

The Trump administration in filings in the case previously disclosed that it had sent just under 2,500 notices to government employees but that they remain on hold.

Illston pointed to declarations from federal employees that outlined the searing toll of the shutdown and the termination notices.

“It’s important to remember that there are human faces on all the actions that we are discussing this morning,” Illston said.

Those actions are “having tremendous impacts on people,” she said.

Illston alluded to one declaration in which an Air Force veteran wrote that he’s terrified that he will lose his health care coverage if he is laid off.

The employee, a regulation analyst at the Federal Aviation Administration, received a life-saving kidney transplant days before the partial government shutdown and said he would not be able to afford his post-surgery treatment if he loses his job and health care coverage.

In a brief, labor groups bringing the suit argued the Trump administration would move forward with even more layoffs unless the court stepped in and implemented a more permanent block.

The Trump administration has proclaimed its intent to go after “Democrat” agencies and programs and doubled down “on the legal fiction that a lapse in funding eliminates agency authority,” they argued in a brief.

“Defendants’ justification for these layoffs has rested on the baseless legal premise that the temporary lapse in funding eliminated statutory authority for agency functions,” the brief read.

Danielle Leonard, an attorney for the labor groups, accused the government of not being straightforward, saying that on multiple occasions it has not provided complete and accurate information regarding the layoffs.

Justice Department attorney Michael Velchik argued there were more reasons to conduct government worker layoffs during a lapse in appropriations, not fewer. When money is not coming into an entity, it should be looking for ways to cut costs, Velchik said.

“This is true for a household, for a firm or for the government,” he said.

_____

©2025 CQ-Roll Call, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Visit cqrollcall.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.