US appeals court sides with Trump, clears way to fire thousands of federal workers

By Daniel Wiessner

(Reuters) -A U.S. appeals court cleared the way on Wednesday for 18 federal agencies to once again fire thousands of employees who lost their jobs as part of President Donald Trump's purge of the federal workforce but were later reinstated by a lower-court judge in Maryland.

The Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the lower-court judge likely lacked the power to hear the lawsuit brought by 19 states and Washington, D.C., to challenge the mass firings of probationary government employees in February.

Probationary employees typically have less than a year of service in their current roles, though some are longtime federal workers in new jobs.

In its 2-1 decision, the 4th Circuit stayed the Maryland ruling pending the Trump administration's appeal, removing the last legal roadblock preventing the government from firing the probationary employees again.

The U.S. Supreme Court had on Tuesday paused a separate ruling by a judge in San Francisco requiring six agencies to reinstate nearly 17,000 probationary workers. Since five of those agencies were also defendants in the Maryland case, the practical effect of the high court's ruling had been limited.

The office of Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown, which is leading the lawsuit, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

In a statement White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said the appeals court had upheld the president's removal powers.

"The Trump Administration continues to rack up legal wins for the American people," Rogers said.

Federal agencies terminated roughly 25,000 probationary employees in mid-February after the U.S. Office of Personnel Management directed them to identify probationary workers who were not essential.

The firings were part of a broader effort by Trump, a Republican, and billionaire Elon Musk to drastically shrink the federal bureaucracy and slash government spending, which has invited a series of legal challenges.

U.S. District Judge James Bredar in Baltimore had issued a temporary restraining order requiring the government to reinstate about 24,600 probationary workers in March. Last week he narrowed his ruling to people who live or work in Washington, D.C., and the states that filed the lawsuit. The 4th Circuit paused that ruling on Wednesday.

'WHAT'S IT TO THEM?'

The states in their lawsuit say the mass firings violated a federal law requiring agencies to give states 60 days' notice of mass layoffs, and would lead to a spike in unemployment claims and demand for social services.

In its brief order on Wednesday, the 4th Circuit said Bredar likely lacked jurisdiction over the lawsuit, but did not elaborate. The Trump administration had argued that Bredar could not hear the case because the states lacked legal standing to sue over the firings, having failed to show how the government's actions would injure them.

In a dissenting opinion, Circuit Judge DeAndrea Gist Benjamin said the states had demonstrated they faced an array of financial harms stemming from the mass firings, including lost tax revenue and an influx in unemployment claims, giving them standing to sue.

"The states have successfully answered the question: 'What's it to them?'" wrote Benjamin, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, a Democrat.

The two judges who voted to stay Bredar's decision are appointees of Republican presidents.

(Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Howard Goller)