A federal judge on Friday issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) blocking the Trump Administration’s effort to overhaul and reorganize 20 agencies in the Executive Branch.
In February, President Trump implemented an executive order to completely overhaul the Executive Branch through the work of DOGE.
US District Judge Susan Illston, a Clinton appointee, said in order for President Trump to make such large-scale overhauls, he needs approval from Congress.
“It is the prerogative of presidents to pursue new policy priorities and to imprint their stamp on the federal government. But to make large-scale overhauls of federal agencies, any president must enlist the help of his co-equal branch and partner, the Congress,” the judge wrote in her order on Friday evening.
“As a group of conservative former government officials and advisors have written to the Court, “Unchecked presidential power is not what the Framers had in mind,”” the radical Clinton judge said scolding Trump’s decision to overhaul agencies in the Executive Branch.
Judge Illston paused any reduction-in-force (RIF) notices to workers in 20 federal agencies.
The judge’s TRO comes in response to a lawsuit filed by the anti-American AFL-CIO and American Federation of Government Employees.
Judge Illston enjoined DOGE, the State Department, Treasury and other agencies.
BREAKING: Another federal judge enters another lawless order enjoining terminations by agencies on a nationwide basis.1/ pic.twitter.com/zkSBfvSHuv
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) May 10, 2025
NPR reported:
A federal judge in San Francisco has temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s sweeping overhaul of the federal government.
The ruling from U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, a Clinton appointee, came after a hearing Friday in a lawsuit filed by a coalition of labor unions, nonprofits and local governments.
The plaintiffs argue in their complaint that President Trump’s efforts to “radically restructure and dismantle the federal government” without any authorization from Congress violate the Constitution.
Illston agreed with the plaintiffs, asserting in the hearing that Supreme Court precedent makes clear that while the president does have the authority to seek changes at agencies, he must do so in lawful ways.
