🔥 POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE: THOUSANDS FIRED BY TRUMP ORDERED TO BE REINSTATED IMMEDIATELY BY FEDERAL JUDGE
A stunning hearing in the Northern District of California has shaken U.S. politics after a federal judge concluded that the Trump Administration unlawfully directed federal agencies to fire tens of thousands of government employees. With the White House refusing to send any officials to testify—and only a lone attorney showing up to defend them—the court decided it had heard enough and moved to reinstate all affected workers on the spot.
A newly released transcript shows the judge growing visibly angry as the administration withdrew sworn declarations, dodged questions, and avoided cross-examination. Plaintiffs presented clear evidence that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) had ordered every federal agency to terminate all probationary employees—an unprecedented move far beyond OPM’s legal authority. The refusal to send witnesses only heightened suspicion of a coordinated, government-wide purge carried out in secrecy.
The judge denounced the administration’s filings as “sham documents” and accused officials of obstructing the search for truth. When the Trump attorney argued that the fired workers were simply “unwanted” and that no directive had been issued, the judge immediately pushed back, saying such claims made an injunction even more necessary. “This is the United States District Court,” the judge scolded. “If you submit declarations, you stand ready for cross-examination.”
One example highlighted during the hearing involved Leandra Bailey, an employee who had just received a performance review rating her “fully successful in every category,” yet was fired the next day using a template letter drafted by OPM. The judge condemned the tactic as a “gimmick” designed to evade legal termination procedures and deny workers their right to unemployment benefits, calling it “a shameful manipulation of the system.”
In a rare move, the judge issued a ruling directly from the bench, declaring all February 13–14 terminations unlawful, and ordering federal agencies—particularly the Department of Veterans Affairs—to immediately offer reinstatement to every affected employee. The court further prohibited OPM from issuing any guidance or instructions related to employee terminations, effectively stripping the agency of any back-channel influence over personnel actions.
Lawmakers reacted swiftly. Senator Richard Blumenthal said the ruling exposed the Trump Administration’s broader “autocratic pattern,” pointing to investigations into major news networks and punitive actions against law firms representing unpopular clients. “This is a direct attack on the rule of law,” Blumenthal warned, arguing that no democracy can function when the government punishes attorneys simply for defending their clients.
Legal experts say the case has implications far beyond the reinstated workers. The transcript reflects a deeper concern shared across the judiciary: escalating threats against judges, prosecutors, and court staff whenever rulings go against Trump. Several cases in recent years have required anonymous juries and special protective orders due to safety concerns, raising alarms about political intimidation becoming normalized.
As court losses mount, observers expect the administration to continue exerting pressure on the judicial system—an escalation some fear could spark a constitutional crisis. But for now, the federal court sent a clear message: no administration, no matter how powerful, can unlawfully strip Americans of their livelihoods. And the thousands of workers fired in violation of the law will be returning to their jobs—effective immediately.
