Cnn
–
A federal judge in Boston allowed the Trump administration to move forward for the moment with its delayed resignation offer to federal employees.
US District Judge George O’Toole said that unions of federal employees, who have brought legal action on behalf of their members, are not directly affected by the offer, they therefore fail to challenge this case. He had previously made a temporary prohibition prescription against the program.
The decision is a major victory for the Trump administration, which has struggled to successfully defend its policies before the court in around four dozen prosecution.
The delayed resignation offer is a key element in the Trump administration’s effort to reduce the federal government.
Some 77,000 workers accepted the package, the Journalists told journalists on Thursday the White House, Karoline Leavitt. The program finished at 7 p.m. on Wednesday.
The offer will generally be Allow them to leave their jobs but to be paid at the end of September – although the unions and many workers said that the information that the administration had published on the package was conflict and conflicting.
The figure of 77,000 represents almost 4% of approximately 2 million federal employees who have received the incentive. However, everyone cannot finally take it because the administration has exempted certain positions after sending the offer – but the number of people in this situation is very low, said Pinover.
The White House said that its objective was between 5% and 10% of employees to resign. Tuesday, Trump took a step to prepare to spreads in widespread Among those who remain.
Eligible employees initially had until the end of last Thursday evening to apply, but the Trump administration extended the deadline at midnight on Monday after Temporary break of O’Toole.
In his five -page decision, O’Toole, appointed from former President Bill Clinton, said he wiped his previous orders who had extended the deadline for federal workers to accept the delayed resignation of the administration.
These orders frustrated the administration’s attempt to quickly bring the supposed buy-off offer closer.
The program was challenged by the American Federation of Government employees and several other unions that argued that it was illegal and hurt them, because it would divert resources to tackle “the tide of the requests for requests and Advice that the fork directive caused ”.
But O’Toole said that these alleged damages are “not sufficient” to give unions the legal law – known as the status – to bring the trial in the first place.
“The unions do not have the direct participation required in the Directive of the Fork, but dispute a policy that affects the others, in particular the employees of the executive branches,” wrote the judge.
AFGE lawyers, the largest federal employee union, assess the decision and assess the next steps, said Everett Kelley, national president of the group, in a statement.
“Today’s decision is a setback in the struggle for dignity and equity for civil servants. But this is not the end of this fight, “he said. “Above all, this decision did not address the underlying legality of the program.”
The white house’s press secretary Karoline Leavitt praised the decision of the Massachusetts judge, a few hours after suggesting that some judges heard cases opposite the Trump administration were “judicial activists”.
“This Boston redemption decision is the first of many legal victories for the president,” Leavitt said in a statement in CNN. “The court dissolved the injunction due to a lack of position. This shows that Lawfare will not prevail finally on the will of 77 million Americans who supported President Trump and his priorities. »»
O’Toole’s decision that unions have no position could have an impact on the various attempts to stop Trump’s administration policies, in particular when the unions of federal workers challenged these policies to the court Washington Federal, DC.
The unions make many emergency claims to prevent the government’s ministry of efficiency around questions of confidentiality, employment and others, and O’Toole noted in its decision that the DC circuit had already held that unions could not go directly to the Federal District Court on a many questions under the Federal Labor Relations Authority.
This story has been updated with additional developments.
Jeff Zelery de CNN, Katelyn Polantz and Alayna Treene contributed to this report.