U.S. Supreme Court clears Trump officials to resume massive government shooting | Trump administration

this U.S. Supreme Court Already for Donald Trump administrative Restoring plans to resume mass shootings by critics warned by federal workers could threaten critical government services.

Extend consecutive victories for the US President The Supreme Justice on Tuesday A lower court order was canceled that freezes federal layoffs known as “reducing force” while lawsuits proceeded.

The decision could result in hundreds of thousands of job losses in the Department of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, the state, the treasury, veterans affairs and other agencies.

Democrats condemned the ruling. “I was disappointed, but I wasn’t shocked or surprised. This radical court on the right, after domination, proved time and time again that they would sing and sing to sing and dance to express the pleasure of Trumpism. A lot of it is just what we see, we are implementing what we see.” Project 2025.transparent

The 2025 project, developed by the Conservative Heritage Foundation’s IQ, has laid out a blueprint for a downsized government. Trump claimed voters gave him a task of an effort, hiring billionaire ally Ally Elon Musk to lead the charge through the Ministry of Government Efficiency, or the Church, despite Musk leaving since then.

In February, Trump announced a “significant shift in the federal bureaucracy” in an executive order directing the agency in preparation for a government overhaul that drastically reduces the labor force and filthy offices.

The Supreme Court said in a brief unsigned order Tuesday that the Trump administration “could succeed in saying that the executive order is enforced” and the memorandum of execution of its orders is legal. The court said it did not assess the legitimacy of any specific plan for federal agencies to lay off employees.

Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the only member of the nine-member court, publicly opposed the decision, which overturned the May 22 ruling by San Francisco-based District Judge Susan Ilsan Illston.

Jackson wrote that Illston’s “interim, practical, harm-reducing preservation of the status quo is irrelevant because the court showed enthusiasm for the president’s legitimate suspicious behavior in an emergency posture”.

She also described her colleagues as “a wrong decision was made at the wrong moment, especially given that the court knew very little about what was actually happening in the local area.”

In her ruling, Illston had argued that Trump had exceeded his powers to order layoffs and get along with a bunch of unions, nonprofits and local governments that challenge the government. “As history has shown, the president can only roughly reorganize federal institutions if he is authorized by Congress,” she wrote.

The judge prevented institutions from making massive layoffs and limited the ability to cut or overhaul federal programs. Ayerston also ordered the resumption of unemployed workers, although she delayed the enforcement of this part of the ruling while the appeal proceedings were made.

Ayerston’s ruling is the broadest ruling against the government overhaul that Trump and the Barrier pursue. Thousands of federal workers have been fired, left their jobs through a resignation program, or have been on leave.

The administration had previously challenged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the San Francisco-based Ninth Circuit, but lost the 2-1 ruling on May 30. This prompted the Justice Department to file an urgent request to the Supreme Court and believed that the personnel controlling federal agencies were “located at the Presidential Administration.”

The plaintiff urged the Supreme Court to deny the Justice Department’s request. allow Trump administration They wrote that in order to continue the “Breakneck restructuring”, which means that “the federal government plans, offices and functions will be abolished, agencies will be deprived of the mandate of Congress, and the loss of critical government services, and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will lose their jobs.”

The Supreme Court’s rejection of the argument on Tuesday was welcomed by Trump’s allies. Attorney General Pam Bondi, Posted on X social media platform: “Today, the Supreme Court has prevented the violation of the law from lower courts from limiting President Trump’s power over federal personnel – another victory for the Supreme Court is attributed to @TheJusticidept attorneys. Now, federal agencies can be more effective than ever before.

State Council Written on X“Today’s almost unanimous ruling from the Supreme Court today further confirms that the law is around us throughout the process. We will continue our historic restructuring program at the State Department, as announced earlier this year. This is the dedication of President Trump on an agenda first to participate in the United States.”

In recent months, the Supreme Court has supported Trump in certain major cases that have been urgently acted since returning to office in January.

It cleared the way for the Trump administration to resume deportation of immigrants to countries other than itself without giving them the opportunity to harm they might face. In both cases, it brought the government eventually to hundreds of thousands of immigrants on humanitarian grounds.

It also allowed Trump to impose his ban on trans people in the U.S. military, blocking a judge’s order to rehire thousands of fired employees and join Doge twice. In addition, the court Curb the power of federal judges Improving a national ruling that hinders presidential policy.

On Tuesday, the Democratic Front League condemned the Supreme Court’s interference in the so-called illegal restructuring of the federal government. it In a statement said: “Today’s decision has dealt a severe blow to our democracy and relied on the services the American people depended on in serious danger.

“This decision does not change the simple and clear fact that our constitution does not allow reorganization of government functions and intercourse with federal workers by chance without any Congressional approval.”