Case Information
*1 Case 3:25-cv-03698-SI Document 162 Filed 06/13/25 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA AMERICAN FEDERATION OF Case No. 25-cv-03698-SI GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, et al., ORDER RE: SCOPE OF INJUNCTIVE Plaintiffs, RELIEF v. DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., DKT. NOS. 148, 155, 160, 161 Defendants.
Plaintiffs filed a notice on June 3, 2025 raising concerns over apparent non-compliance with the Court’s May 9, 2025 temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or with the Court’s May 22 preliminary injunction. See Dkt. No. 148. Specifically, plaintiffs expressed concern about the termination of probationary employees at defendant Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) after the issuance of the Court’s TRO., and with the defendant State
Department’s notification to Congress that it would soon initiate widespread reductions in force. Id. On June 4, 2025, the Court directed defendants to provide a factual showing as to why these actions were not prohibited by the injunction. Dkt. No. 151. Defendants subsequently submitted declarations from officials at the State Department and HUD. Dkt. No. 155. Plaintiffs submitted additional documentary evidence to the Court, to which defendants responded with an additional declaration from the same State Department official. Dkt. Nos. 160, 161.
For the reasons stated in its hearing on June 13, 2025, the Court finds that actions to be taken pursuant to the State Department’s reorganization plans first announced publicly on April 22, 2025 and later provided to Congress are prohibited by the Court’s injunctive relief, as are all final separations scheduled in the State Department’s Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and *2 Case 3:25-cv-03698-SI Document 162 Filed 06/13/25 Page 2 of 2 Interference program. If the State Department has any question about whether planned actions fall within the scope of the Court’s injunction, the Court ORDERS the Department to first raise those questions with the Court before taking action. Further, if the State Department determines that it needs to correct any factual information in the various Holler declarations presented to the Court, it should do so forthwith.
Regarding the termination of probationary employees at HUD, the Court does not have enough information to determine whether or not this action was prohibited by the Court’s injunction. The Court therefore directs defendant HUD to provide to the Court for in camera review a copy of any Phase 1 or Phase 2 Agency RIF and Reorganization Plans (ARRPs) it has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget and/or the Office of Personnel Management and any versions of ARRPs that the OMB and/or OPM have approved. Defendant HUD must also provide the same ARRPs to plaintiffs’ counsel, but plaintiffs’ counsel may not share the plans or their contents with their clients or any third parties unless or until the Court orders otherwise. The Court requests that defendant HUD provide these plans by 3:00 p.m. (PDT) on Tuesday, June 17, 2025. IT IS SO ORDERED . Dated: June 13, 2025 ______________________________________
SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge
2