A federal judge in San Francisco has extended a court order halting the termination of federal employees during the ongoing U.S. government shutdown, in a decision that further challenges the administration’s handling of the crisis. The move prevents agencies from proceeding with any shutdown-related layoffs, which labor unions have described as “illegal and politically driven.”
The ruling, issued by Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, keeps in place a temporary restraining order first enacted earlier this month. It now functions as a preliminary injunction, stopping the administration from implementing mass reductions in force (RIFs) that were announced amid the shutdown.
In her decision, Judge Illston said the plaintiffs—federal employee unions including the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU)—had provided “credible evidence” that the layoffs were carried out in violation of existing law and could cause “irreparable harm” to the federal workforce.
“The government has failed to justify why large-scale terminations during a lapse in appropriations should proceed without congressional authorization,” Illston wrote. “The court cannot permit actions that appear both unlawful and retaliatory.”
According to court filings, more than 4,000 federal workers across multiple agencies had received termination notices since the shutdown began on October 1. The administration had signaled plans to expand those layoffs to potentially 10,000 employees, citing budget constraints and “operational necessity.”
Union leaders, however, argued that the move violated federal labor law and long-standing shutdown procedures. “No administration in modern history has attempted mass firings during a funding lapse,” said Everett Kelley, president of the AFGE. “This was not about fiscal management—it was about punishing career workers for political gain.”
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which had directed agencies to prepare the layoffs, declined to comment on the ongoing litigation. However, White House officials hinted that the administration might appeal the injunction, setting up another legal confrontation as the shutdown enters its fifth week.
Legal experts say the case could set a major precedent for how far the executive branch can go in managing personnel during funding gaps. “This is about more than paychecks—it’s about the limits of presidential power during a shutdown,” said Dr. Maya Schwartz, a professor of administrative law at Georgetown University. “If the injunction holds, it will redefine the boundaries of emergency executive authority.”
Meanwhile, the ruling provides temporary relief for thousands of federal employees who had faced uncertainty over their jobs. For many, the injunction represents a rare victory amid weeks of financial stress and political turmoil.
As Congress remains deadlocked over a budget resolution, the court’s decision underscores a broader reality: the nation’s shutdown crisis is not only a political battle—but also a test of legality, governance, and accountability.
Watch video below :
