'This discrepancy is not insignificant': Judge alleges Trump admin misled SCOTUS about injunction over federal layoffs

Source: Law & Crime

Jul 29th, 2025, 2:43 pm


The Trump administration provided incorrect information to the U.S. Supreme Court in a recent high-profile case about firing federal employees, according to a federal judge sitting in San Francisco. On Monday, in a terse, two-page filing, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, a Bill Clinton appointee, told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit that the U.S. Department of Justice substantially mischaracterized the reach of a preliminary injunction the lower court issued in response to one of President Donald Trump's executive orders.

That injunction, issued in late May, came on the heels of a temporary restraining order issued in early May. Later that same month, a three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit upheld the lower court order, rejecting the government's request to stay the injunction.

Then, in early June, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer filed a 147-page application for an emergency stay with the nation's high court. In that application, Sauer described Illston's injunction in the following terms: "In fact, this Office has been informed by OPM that about 40 [reductions in force] in 17 agencies were in progress and are currently enjoined."

Now, Illston says Sauer protested a bit too much. The district court judge, in her Monday statement, alleges the fourth-highest ranking DOJ official got both sets of numbers wrong.

Read more: https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/this-discrepancy-is-not-insignificant-judge-alleges-trump-admin-misled-scotus-about-injunction-over-federal-layoffs/

---

Link to FILING (PDF viewer) - https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26035118-afge-v-trump-illston/

Link to FILING (PDF) - https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/26035118/afge-v-trump-illston.pdf


This is dealing with the big case of the illegal reorg and mass firings/rehirings of federal employees that is still going on BECAUSE the SCOTUS lifted the injunction on them to allow the lower courts to hash it out. In the OP's case, the District court judge is providing info to the Appeals court regarding a finding of screw-ups/exaggerations of the 45 lawyers that were used to get the injunctions lifted by the SCOTUS.

REFERENCES

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143456537
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143458063
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143460216
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143464688
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143465018
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143469050
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143470488
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143471816
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143477999