US judge pauses Trump’s initiative to remove federal employees

BOSTON — The initiative by President Donald Trump to reduce the size of the federal workforce remains stalled following a court hearing that took place on Monday afternoon. This incident is yet another illustration of how the president’s ambitious proposals have faced hurdles within the judicial framework.

U.S. District Judge George O’Toole Jr. had previously placed a hold on the deferred resignation initiative, often referred to as a buyout, last week. During the latest proceedings, he confirmed that this hold would persist until he reaches a decision on the matter, although a timeline for that ruling is currently uncertain.

In an effort to encourage federal employees to leave their positions, Trump has advocated for financial incentives. As reported by the White House, approximately 65,000 federal workers had accepted the government’s offer as of last Friday. In remarks made to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump expressed his disapproval towards those advocating for remote work. “Nobody is gonna work from home,” he asserted. “They are gonna be going out, they’re gonna play tennis, they’re gonna play golf, they’re gonna do a lot of things. They’re not working.”

This deferred resignation program is being pushed forward by Elon Musk, who serves as Trump’s key adviser in the aim to cut federal expenses. Through the initiative, employees have the option to cease their duties while continuing to receive a paycheck until September 30.

However, labor unions have contested the legality of the proposed plan. They petitioned Judge O’Toole to maintain the hold and prevent the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from soliciting further applications from workers interested in participating. Elena Goldstein, representing the workers, raised significant concerns regarding the plan’s justification and legality. “OPM seems to be making this up as they are going along,” she stated.

Goldstein branded the initiative as an “unprecedented action” executed on a similarly unprecedented timeline, asserting that it served as a pretext for displacing existing workers and replacing them with individuals sympathetic to the administration.

In defense of the plan, Eric Hamilton, a lawyer for the Justice Department, characterized it as a “humane off ramp” for federal employees who had possibly structured their lives around remote work but are now being compelled to return to their offices.