A US federal judge has dissolved a temporary restraining order against the Donald Trump Administration in a major win for DOGE against USAID.
Judge Carl J. Nichols, who was appointed by Trump in 2019, has lifted the limited temporary restraining order he granted on February 7 that blocked the president from placing 2,200 USAID workers on paid leave.
Two unions associated with the agency had filed a last-minute lawsuit in an attempt to save it after Trump argued that the overseas aid agency is not a valuable use of taxpayer money and wanted to dismantle it.
They argue that the government was violating the US Constitution and that USAID workers were suffering harm, but Nichols wrote in a decision on Friday that they hadn’t proved USAID workers would be irreparably harmed.
‘Plaintiffs assert that the executive branch’s challenged conduct has harmed (and will harm) them and their members in multiple ways,’ Nichols wrote in the decision. ‘But to qualify as irreparable harm, the injury alleged “must be both certain and great; it must be actual and not theoretical.”
‘Upon scrutiny, the employment-related injuries that plaintiffs assert here are not irreparable ones warranting the “extraordinary remedy” of a preliminary injunction.’
USAID workers overseas will have the option to return to the US and their travels would be funded by the agency. However, they can also choose to stay on paid leave at their foreign posts and will still have access to vital resources.
Nichols determined that the harm was ‘more minimal than it initially appeared,’ and therefore, could not constitute as ‘irreparable harm.’
The Republican judge also accused the unions of ‘overstating’ the harm that would be brought on employees by the Trump Administration’s executive order.
The temporary restraining order was issued after the court found there could be harm to employees if the more than 2,000 overseas were forced to return to the US within 30 days.
However, Nichols determined the harm wasn’t enough, considering coming back to the US was an option.
Although, employees could face financial harm if they choose to return after the 30-day window, ‘monetary harm is typically not irreparable’ and USAID workers would be able to request compensation relief.
Although, they are not guaranteed the money back.
‘For these reasons, plaintiffs have not established that their members would suffer imminent irreparable harm as a result of the government’s challenged actions absent a preliminary injunction,’ Nichols wrote.
However, Nichols didn’t rule out completely that the agency could face irreparable harm later if the fears that Trump will dismantle the entire department come to pass.
‘But at present, the agency is still standing,’ he wrote.
He also ruled most of the union’s claims were employment-based and that ‘Congress has established “comprehensive” statutory schemes governing the review of employment disputes.’
He also said it was not the court’s place to make a decision on whether or not USAID was essential for the government to function or not.
‘Weighing plaintiffs’ assertions on these questions against the government’s is like comparing apples to oranges,’ he wrote.
Much controversy has sparked from Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) as he continues to bulldoze through several government agencies in an attempt to uncover corrupt spending.
Several lawsuits have sparked since January 20 about Musk’s cost-cutting slashes, but DOGE has managed to prevail in some cases.
A federal judge denied liberals’ last ditch attempt to stop ‘First Buddy’ from accessing government data in a huge victory for DOGE.
The lawsuit against DOGE was filed by 14 states’ attorneys general in a coordinated effort to strip Musk of his power as his department gained access to swaths of sensitive data at multiple federal agencies.
While US District Judge Tanya Chutkan found that there are legitimate questions about Musk’s authority, she said there isn’t evidence of the kind of grave legal harm that would justify a temporary restraining order.
The states’ attorneys general argued that Musk is wielding the kind of power that the Constitution says can only be held by those who are elected or confirmed by the Senate.
The Trump administration, for its part, has maintained that layoffs are coming from agency heads, and asserted that despite his public cheering of the effort Musk isn’t directly running DOGE’s day-to-day operations himself.
Chutkan said their questions about Musk’s apparent ‘unchecked authority’ and lack of Congressional oversight for DOGE are legitimate and they may be able to successfully argue them later.
Still, at this point, it remains unclear exactly how DOGE’s work will affect the states, and judges can only issue court only issue orders to block specific, immediate harms, she found.
A Massachusetts judge also lifted a temporary freeze on Trump’s ‘buyout’ offer to federal workers.
District Judge George O’Toole ruled the unions lack standing to challenge the directive and are not directly impacted by it.
O’Toole, a President Clinton appointee, lifted the temporary restraining order on February 10.
‘Aggrieved employees can bring claims through the administrative process,’ he also wrote.