Injunction blocks 10,000 firings of Health and Human Services employees

Twenty state plaintiffs won an injunction July 1 blocking the mass termination and reorganization of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The 58-page ruling from Rhode Island District Judge Melissa DuBose halts HHS’ plan, announced March 27, to fire 10,000 out of the departments’ 28,000 employees, consolidate divisions from 28 to 15, and cut the number of regional offices from 10 to five. Ten thousand employees have already been placed on administrative leave, according to the injunction.

“The Court concludes the States have shown a likelihood of success on their claims that the HHS’s action was both arbitrary and capricious as well as contrary to law,” the injunction says.

Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told media that the consolidation would generate mistakes, and that 20% of fired employees would need to be reinstated. He told CBS News that examining job responsibilities before firing employees “takes too long.” HHS already revoked the termination notices sent to 300 employees of the National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety. In a supplemental memorandum filed June 17, the department said it revoked notices sent to 467 employees across five departments.

“Those employees were expected to return to their positions starting yesterday, and will assist in restoring functionality to several CDC functions that are central to Plaintiffs’ claims. This development undermines Plaintiffs’ claims of irreparable harm and statutory violations with respect to those functions. It also shows why Plaintiffs’ lawsuit and motion are premature: they request this Court’s intervention to freeze in place an anticipated restructuring that is still in the planning stages and that is not final agency action,” the government’s document said.

State plaintiffs claimed in their May 5 complaint that the terminations usurped legislative authority, violated the Constitution’s appropriations clause, was outside the scope of statutory authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in two ways: by being arbitrary and capricious, and by being contrary to law.

DuBose, the judge, found that the states had standing to sue because they rely on the HHS to test and prevent diseases, collect data for policy development, regulate the sale of tobacco products, assist with child welfare and provide federal poverty guidelines. 

She found that the states were likely to succeed in their arguments that the firings were arbitrary in violation of the APA, based partly on Kennedy’s statements.

“Instead of undertaking an intentional and thoughtful process for weighing the benefits and drawbacks of implementing the sweeping policy change, the Defendants hastily restructured the sub-agencies and issued RIF notices. The Defendants have failed to demonstrate how the workforce terminations and restructurings made the subagencies more efficient, saved taxpayer dollars, or aligned with HHS’s priority of ‘ending America’s epidemic of chronic illness, by focusing on safe, wholesome food, clean water, and the elimination of environmental toxins.’ In fact, the record is completely devoid of any evidence that the Defendants have performed any research on the repercussions of issuing and executing the plans announced,” DuBose wrote.

The plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that the firings would stop HHS from carrying out its legal responsibilities, DuBose ruled. A likelihood of success is necessary for an injunction to be granted.

“Here, the Court finds that the (plan) contravenes congressional directives and statutory law. The States have presented copious clear examples in which Congress has appropriated funds to the federal programs and outlined how those funds are to be used. The Defendants, on the other hand, have yet to proffer any evidence demonstrating that the planned terminations would not decimate the Congressionally created sub-agencies or inhibit them from fulfilling their mandates,” DuBose wrote.

The injunction orders HHS not to fire any employees they had put on notice, not to place any more employees on notice and not to place any employees on administrative leave.

DuBose concluded the ruling with a discussion of the separation of powers.

“The Executive Branch is vested with the power and is imbued with the responsibility to faithfully execute the laws which govern the governance structure of our country. The Executive Branch does not have the authority to order, organize, or implement wholesale changes to the structure and function of the agencies created by Congress. As Judge (William) Smith in this district court recently warned when presented with the declining depth of civics education in public schools, “we may choose to survive as a country by respecting our Constitution, the laws and norms of political and civic behavior, and by educating our children on civics, the rule of law, and what it really means to be an American, and what America means. Or, we may ignore these things at our and their peril,” DuBose wrote.

Attorney General Bonta said in a press release that HHS’ work is critical, and the planned firings were unlawful.

“The Trump Administration is not only acting against the best interest of Americans nationwide, but is once again acting beyond its power — the President does not have the power to incapacitate a department that Congress created, nor can it decline to spend funds that were appropriated by Congress for that department. We look forward to continuing to make our case in court,” Bonta stated in the release.

Read the injunction here.