By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Senior National Correspondent
A coalition of civil servants across nine federal agencies has filed a formal complaint with the Office of Special Counsel, alleging the Trump administration terminated them solely because of their probationary status rather than their performance or conduct. The complaint, the first of its kind, was brought before Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger, who was reinstated to his position by a federal court after Trump attempted to remove him. The filing follows a directive from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management instructing agencies to identify employees without full civil service protections and conduct mass terminations. The complaint states that the suit will eventually cover additional agencies.
“The vast majority of the American people—more than 90%—believe that civil servants should be promoted based on their merit, not on loyalty. Yet, the Trump administration is seeking to undermine that value by purging non-partisan career civil servants and prioritizing partisan loyalists,” said Skye Perryman, President and CEO of Democracy Forward, which is representing the terminated employees. “Our civil servants do everything from keeping our food and medicine safe to securing our borders to improving our communities. We will use all legal tools available to protect them from arbitrary firings designed to politicize our government.” Michelle Bercovici, a partner at the Alden Law Group, which joined Democracy Forward in filing the complaint, called the terminations an “unprecedented and grossly unfair circumvention of the merit principles upon which our civil service is based.”
“These hard-working employees should have the opportunity to let their work speak for itself,” Bercovici said. Two days before the filing of that complaint, the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE-IAM) and a coalition of labor unions sued the Trump administration, challenging the legality of the mass firings. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, contests the dismissal of probationary employees, a deferred resignation strategy aimed at pressuring workers to leave voluntarily, and large-scale reductions in force that violate federal statutes. “The Trump administration’s executive actions to gut the federal workforce are not only illegal but will also have damaging consequences for federal employees and the public services they provide,” said NFFE National President Randy Erwin. “The courts must intervene and hold this administration accountable for violating federal laws before it is too late. Federal workers are your friends and neighbors who have dedicated their careers to serving our country. We cannot let the president disrupt their lives and dismantle critical services relied upon by the American people.”
The lawsuit also accuses the administration of unlawfully undermining Congress’s authority by eliminating federal agencies and positions authorized by the legislative branch. It calls for a ruling declaring the mass terminations and deferred resignation program unlawful. “If this administration and Elon Musk truly wanted to make our government more efficient, they would have taken the time to understand that these actions will only lead to chaos and poor service for the American people,” Erwin said. “Instead, they are illegally targeting federal agencies, their missions, and workers to pay for proposed tax cuts for the wealthy. These efforts hurt middle-class Americans who chose to work in service to the public as federal employees. It is unpatriotic and unacceptable.” New Mexico Rep. Melanie Stansbury added, “We stand with our federal workers and are fighting back.”
The legal challenges against the administration’s actions extend beyond mass firings. A group of federal employees is suing the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) for allegedly using an unauthorized server to send mass email blasts across the federal government. The plaintiffs argue the system stores sensitive information, including data on individuals outside the federal executive branch. The lawsuit follows a ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Randolph D. Moss, who denied the plaintiffs’ request for a temporary restraining order to halt the operation of the server while the case proceeds. The initial complaint alleged that OPM sidestepped federal law by failing to conduct a privacy impact assessment before launching the Government-Wide Email System (GWES). The agency later issued an assessment but argued it was unnecessary since the system contained only federal employee data. The plaintiffs countered that individuals outside the executive branch received OPM’s mass emails, raising concerns about improperly storing their information. The amended complaint adds five additional plaintiffs, including individuals affiliated with a National Resources Conservation District, a California state program partnering with the federal government, and a Library of Congress employee.
In another case, a broad coalition of higher education leaders, restaurant workers, and the City of Baltimore has filed for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block Trump’s executive orders dismantling diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) programs. The lawsuit, brought by the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE), the American Association of University Professors, Restaurant Opportunities Centers United (ROC), and Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott, argues that the orders have already led to grant freezes, job losses, and forced self-censorship. “The president’s executive orders are unconstitutional and seek to bring extreme harm and devastation to anybody or anything that does not share his exact values,” Scott said. “That kind of thinking within itself is un-American, as we are supposed to be in a melting pot where all beliefs and values are respected.”
NADOHE President and CEO Paulette Granberry Russell called Trump’s actions “an affront to the values that define our nation.” “Our fight for diversity, equity, and inclusion is a fight for justice, and we will not waver,” Russell said. ROC Interim President Teófilo L. Reyes warned that Trump’s efforts to dismantle workplace protections and DEIA programs are unlawful. “The president seeks to create barriers and perpetuate fear rather than promote diverse talent and a stronger workforce,” Reyes said. “But Trump cannot override decades of legal precedent. The Restaurant Opportunities Centers United and our worker members— the majority of whom are women, people of color, and immigrants—will continue to stand together against this unconstitutional political manipulation.”
Democracy Forward, representing the plaintiffs, called on the courts to intervene. “The president’s executive orders punish millions of Americans simply because the president does not believe in diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility,” said John C. Yang, President and Executive Director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC. “These executive orders penalize not only academic institutions, workplaces, and the various organizations that advocate on their behalf; they will hurt everyone. Terminating funds for federal grantees will have immediate effects by halting critical research and withholding economic support for programs that make our country stronger and more competitive.”
Separately, FBI agents who investigated Trump have sued the Justice Department, seeking an immediate halt to the administration’s efforts to compile a list of employees involved in probes of the Jan. 6 attack and Trump’s classified documents case. The agents argue that the list is an act of retaliation meant to intimidate personnel and deter future investigations into Trump’s conduct. “The very act of compiling lists of persons who worked on matters that upset Donald Trump is retaliatory in nature, intended to intimidate FBI agents and other personnel and to discourage them from reporting any future malfeasance by Donald Trump and his agents,” the lawsuit states. The complaint cites the Justice Department’s recent firing of prosecutors on special counsel Jack Smith’s team as evidence that Trump’s administration targets those involved in investigations against him.
