Federal Unions Push for Release of RIF Plans Following Supreme Court Decision

Union attorneys are intensifying their efforts to compel federal agencies to release detailed Reduction in Force (RIF) plans. This renewed push comes in the wake of a recent Supreme Court ruling that, while broadly allowing the Trump Administration to proceed with staff reduction initiatives, notably left open the question of the individual legality of these plans.

U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston, in an order issued Wednesday, expressed skepticism regarding the government’s claim that these Agency RIF and Reorganization Plans (ARRPs) are protected by deliberative process privilege. She has mandated government attorneys to provide further arguments by Monday defending their decision to withhold the full contents of these plans. Judge Illston’s stance follows an urgent filing by union lawyers, who highlighted that the Supreme Court’s decision on Tuesday specifically refrained from ruling on the legality of the plans themselves, despite upholding the administration’s general authority to order such reductions.

Union representatives argue that the ARRPs are “highly relevant” to the unresolved legal questions and are crucial for understanding the scope and nature of impending staff actions. They warn that RIFs under these undisclosed plans are now imminent.

The government, in its application for an emergency stay before the Supreme Court, revealed that 40 separate RIF plans across 17 agencies are ready for implementation, currently only halted by Judge Illston’s preliminary injunction from last month. Judge Illston has ordered the disclosure of the affected agencies by Monday and, after a private review, indicated her strong inclination to order the full release of these final plans. She specifically noted that the final versions of ARRPs at the 17 agencies are likely not protected by deliberative process privilege.

Despite these developments, the administration continues to argue that these documents contain sensitive, pre-decisional information and should remain confidential. An OMB senior advisor stated that ARRPs are “living documents” subject to constant change.

While the Supreme Court’s ruling permits the administration to pursue workforce reductions, legal experts note that individual employees affected by RIFs still retain avenues for recourse through the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Agencies would bear the burden of proving compliance with federal RIF regulations. Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s decision leaves open the critical possibility that specific agency ARRPs could be invalidated by lower courts even before individual terminations commence, ensuring ongoing legal scrutiny of how these reductions are ultimately implemented.

阅读中文版 (Read Chinese Version)

Disclaimer: This content is aggregated from public sources online. Please verify information independently. If you believe your rights have been infringed, contact us for removal.