The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →On March 13, 2025, U.S. District Judge William Alsup ordered six federal departments to immediately offer reinstatement to probationary employees they had fired in mid-February. That was an instruction to make offers, not proof that workers returned to their jobs. The Supreme Court later set aside the March order on a procedural basis without deciding its merits; in September 2025, Alsup found that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) had acted unlawfully but did not order reinstatement. Instead, most defendant agencies had to correct personnel records and notify affected workers.
Why Alsup called the firings a “sham”
The case was brought by unions and nonprofits representing federal employees in the Northern District of California. The dispute was about how the mid-February terminations were directed and explained—not whether the administration could ever reduce the federal workforce.
Alsup concluded that OPM had directed agencies to terminate probationary employees, with an exception for mission-critical workers. The government argued that OPM had offered guidance and that individual agencies made their own decisions. The judge also challenged the administration’s characterization of the firings as performance-based, noting that some affected employees had received positive evaluations, and criticized declarations submitted to the court.
As reported by Gizmodo, Alsup described the asserted performance rationale as “a sham in order to try to avoid statutory requirements.” He clarified that he was not barring a lawful reduction in force. The ruling addressed the process and justification for these particular terminations, not a general prohibition on workforce reductions.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems#1 Best Overall
Who the March order covered
The March 13 order directed six departments to immediately offer reinstatement to probationary employees terminated in mid-February:
- Department of Veterans Affairs
- Department of Agriculture
- Department of Defense
- Department of Energy
- Department of the Interior
- Department of the Treasury
Associated Press later reported that departments’ legal declarations identified more than 25,000 probationary workers terminated soon after President Trump took office in January 2025. That figure describes reported terminations across the litigation; it is not the number of workers covered by Alsup’s order, nor a count of people who were reinstated. A separate Maryland case involved a plaintiffs’ estimate of about 24,000 affected workers and a broader set of agencies, so that estimate should not be substituted for the scope of Alsup’s order.
What happened to the order and the case
| Date | Ruling or action | Practical effect |
|---|---|---|
| March 13, 2025 | Alsup issued the initial order. | Six departments were directed to immediately offer reinstatement to the covered probationary workers. |
| March 26–27, 2025 | A divided Ninth Circuit panel declined the administration’s request to pause the order. | The order was not stayed by that panel while the administration pursued further review. |
| April 2025 | The Supreme Court set aside the March reinstatement decision on a technical basis. | As AP summarized it, the Court did not decide the underlying merits of Alsup’s findings. |
| September 12, 2025 (reported September 15) | Alsup entered judgment for the unions and nonprofits, finding that OPM unlawfully exceeded its authority. | He did not order reinstatement at that stage. Most defendant agencies were ordered to update personnel files and send individual letters correcting the stated reason for termination. AP reported that the State Department and NASA were exempt. |
Were the workers actually reinstated?
The March order required the departments to offer reinstatement, but that instruction alone does not establish that every covered worker accepted an offer or returned to a post. The Supreme Court’s April action set aside that order without resolving the merits. By September, Alsup said circumstances had changed: time had passed, employees had moved on, and agencies had been reorganized. His later judgment therefore provided record corrections and notice rather than a new reinstatement order.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.A separate DOGE-related case is not this employee case
A Southern District of New York decision dated September 23, 2026, concerned claims about DOGE-affiliated access to Treasury systems, not the probationary-worker terminations before Alsup. That court dismissed access claims as moot after the relevant executive order expired and the Treasury team was disbanded, and dismissed remaining claims for failure to state a claim. It does not determine whether the fired employees in Alsup’s case were reinstated or alter his September 2025 judgment.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Quick Recap
Rank #4
Rank #3
- Book - the color of law a forgotten history of how our government segregated america
- Language: english
- Binding: paperback
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
