On Wednesday, the Federal Appeal Court rejected an attempt by the Trump administration to stop the minimum court ruling that forces government agencies to return thousands of employees who were dismissed last month.
In the ruling of 2-1, the American Court of Appeal of the Ninth Chamber rejected the administration's attempt to stay on the provincial judge in the United States, William Alsup, on March 13, which ordered the departments of old warriors affairs, defense, energy, interior, agriculture and treasury “immediately” to provide all monitoring employees in or around Feb.
Judges Bari Silverman and Anna de Alba – appointed to former presidents Bill Clinton and Joe Biden, respectively – were in favor of leaving the Zob's matter in his place, while Judge Bridget was in Bid, and he was appointed by President Trump, not different.
“The appellant has not proven that they could not succeed in the advantages of this call, nor will they suffer from an irreplaceable damage from compliance with a preliminary judicial order,” he read the opinion of the majority.
Silberman and De Alba also argued that the Trump administration had not proven “the possibility that the provincial court has been clearly mistaken in finding that the six agencies were directed by the United States Personnel Management Office to shoot test staff” in violation of federal laws that dictate the so -called “valid reduction” procedures.
Meanwhile, the rulers said that the plaintiffs in the case – the trade unions of federal workers – provided evidence of various concrete injuries, and the provincial court carefully analyzed these evidence and decided that it was sufficient.
In the opposition, Bade indicated that the unions “did not meet their fathers to show that they had a position, and therefore the government is likely to prevail over the judicial foundations because the provincial court had no jurisdiction to enter a preliminary judicial order.”
He also argued by Trump's point that the minimum ruling may not “give” alleged damage to the plaintiffs.
“Returning the employees does not mean that they will return to the same positions and tasks, or that the agencies will provide the services in which the organizational prosecutors want,” it is possible that they are in the hands of different agencies that will reset these employees to new employees, or allocate them in various tasks, or give them from their mission and services increasing.
“Moreover, it is not clear that the provincial court has the authority to direct the legal staff management decisions within the agencies,” she added.
The White House criticized Alsup's preliminary referee, on the pretext that the judge, who is based in San Francisco, was trying to “seize the employment and launch power of the executive branch unconstitutionally.”
“The president has the authority to exercise the authority of the entire executive authority – the individual boycott court judges cannot offend the entire judiciary to thwart the president's agenda,” said Caroline Levitt, a White House press secretary earlier this month.
She added: “If the judge of the Federal District Court wants the executive forces, they can try to run for the presidency themselves.”
The lawyers of the Ministry of Justice have argued that the six agencies themselves, not the employee management office, took the shooting decisions – which affected federal employees who were in the job for a period of less than a year – in an attempt to comply with the Trump administration's goal of reducing the size of the government.
