SCOTUS greenlights Trump's federal firings
The Trump administration can conduct mass firings without Congress' permission, the Supreme Court ruled
What happened
The Supreme Court Tuesday ruled that the Trump administration can conduct mass federal firings without Congress' permission. The decision lifts a lower court's block on an executive order President Donald Trump issued in February aimed at "eliminating waste, bloat, and insularity" across government and paves the way for thousands of workers to be cut from multiple departments.
Who said what
This case "represents a key test" of the extent of Trump's "power to reorganize the government without input from Congress," said The New York Times. White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said the ruling "clearly rebukes the continued assaults" on the president's executive powers.
The order was unsigned and did not include a vote count. But in a 15-page dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the court's three liberals, called the decision "hubristic and senseless" and warned it would "release the president's wrecking ball" on the government workforce. A coalition of labor unions, nonprofits, and local governments said that regardless of Tuesday's ruling, firing federal workers "en masse haphazardly without any congressional approval" was unconstitutional.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
What next?
The ruling is temporary, while litigation over Trump's executive order proceeds. "In practice, it means he is free to pursue his restructuring plans," said the Times. Several departments, including State and Veterans Affairs, have already announced steep workforce cuts. But while the ruling "cleared one major legal obstacle" for the administration, further challenges "could alter the scope and timing of the cuts," unnamed White House sources told Reuters.
-
A peek inside Europe’s luxury new sleeper busThe Week Recommends Overnight service with stops across Switzerland and the Netherlands promises a comfortable no-fly adventure
-
Space data centers could be joining the orbitUnder the radar The AI revolution is going cosmic
-
Codeword: December 23, 2025The daily codeword puzzle from The Week
-
The MAGA civil war takes center stage at the Turning Point USA conferenceIN THE SPOTLIGHT ‘Americafest 2025’ was a who’s who of right-wing heavyweights eager to settle scores and lay claim to the future of MAGA
-
CBS pulls ‘60 Minutes’ report on Trump deporteesSpeed Read An investigation into the deportations of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador’s notorious prison was scrapped
-
Trump administration posts sliver of Epstein filesSpeed Read Many of the Justice Department documents were heavily redacted, though new photos of both Donald Trump and Bill Clinton emerged
-
Is Trump deliberately redacting Epstein files to shield himself?Today’s Big Question Removal of image from publicly released documents prompts accusations of political interference by justice department
-
What Nick Fuentes and the Groypers wantThe Explainer White supremacism has a new face in the US: a clean-cut 27-year-old with a vast social media following
-
Trump HHS moves to end care for trans youthSpeed Read The administration is making sweeping proposals that would eliminate gender-affirming care for Americans under age 18
-
Why does Trump want to reclassify marijuana?Today's Big Question Nearly two-thirds of Americans want legalization
-
Jack Smith tells House of ‘proof’ of Trump’s crimesSpeed Read President Donald Trump ‘engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election,’ hoarded classified documents and ‘repeatedly tried to obstruct justice’
