Sightful Invest
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Politics
  • Stock
Top Posts
Trump lashes out at Crockett, renews call for...
Trump goes after Zelenskyy over ‘land swapping’ dispute,...
Democratic whistleblower told FBI that Adam Schiff approved...
MORNING GLORY: Trump meets Putin amid an era...
‘Things need to change’: Senate Democrats sharpen criticism...
Mamdani zings Cuomo in rent-stabilized housing spat during...
Unearthed emails reveal White House nixed Biden visiting...
Strong drilling targets identified next to high-grade gold-copper...
Seymour Lithium Project Achieves Permitting Milestone
Acquisition of Silver Extraction Technology
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Politics
  • Stock

Sightful Invest

Politics

Judge tells government watchdogs fired by Trump there’s not much she can do for them

by admin March 28, 2025
March 28, 2025
Judge tells government watchdogs fired by Trump there’s not much she can do for them

Eight inspectors general abruptly fired by President Donald Trump at the start of his second term appeared in federal court Thursday to challenge their dismissals — a long-shot case that nonetheless sparked fireworks during oral arguments.

U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes acknowledged on Thursday that it would be difficult for the court to reinstate the eight ousted inspectors generals, who were part of a broader group of 17 government watchdogs abruptly terminated by Trump in January, just four days into his second White House term. 

In a lawsuit last month, the eight inspectors general challenged their firings as both ‘unlawful and unjustified’ and asked to be reinstated — a remedy that Reyes acknowledged Thursday would be exceedingly difficult, even if she were to find that their firings were unconstitutional.

 ‘Unless you convince me otherwise,’ she told the plaintiffs, ‘I don’t see how I could reinstate the inspectors general’ to their roles.

Reyes suggested that the best the court could do would be to order back pay, even as she told both parties, ‘I don’t think anyone can contest that the removal of these people — the way that they were fired — was a violation of the law.’

The preliminary injunction hearing comes more than a month after the eight fired inspectors general filed a lawsuit challenging their termination as unconstitutional. Plaintiffs asked the judge to restore them to their positions, noting in the filing, ‘President Trump’s attempt to eliminate a crucial and longstanding source of impartial, non-partisan oversight of his administration is contrary to the rule of law.’  

Still, the remedies are considered a long shot — and Trump supporters have argued that the president was well within his executive branch powers to make such personnel decisions under Article II of the Constitution, Supreme Court precedent and updates to federal policy.

In 2022, Congress updated its Inspector General Act of 1978, which formerly required a president to communicate to Congress any ‘reasons’ for terminations 30 days before any decision was made. That notice provision was amended in 2022 to require only a ‘substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons’ for terminations.

The 30-day period was a major focus of Thursday’s hearing, as the court weighed whether inspectors general can be considered ‘principal’ or inferior officers. 

The White House Director of Presidential Personnel has claimed that the firings are in line with that requirement, which were a reflection of ‘changing priorities’ from within the administration. 

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, suggested earlier this year that Congress should be given more information as to the reasons for the firings, though more recently he has declined to elaborate on the matter.

Reyes, for her part, previously did not appear to be moved by the plaintiffs’ bid for emergency relief.

She declined to grant their earlier request for a temporary restraining order — a tough legal test that requires plaintiffs to prove ‘irreparable’ and immediate harm as a result of the actions — and told both parties during the hearing that, barring new or revelatory information, she is not inclined to rule in favor of plaintiffs at the larger preliminary injunction hearing.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

previous post
Trump’s newest executive order moves to end collective bargaining at agencies safeguarding national security
next post
HHS axes more than $300M in gender, DEI-related health grants to California alone

You may also like

Durbin calls on DOJ to investigate anonymous pizza...

May 7, 2025

Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ heads to House-wide vote...

May 22, 2025

NRCC launches ad campaign targeting dozens of vulnerable...

April 11, 2025

Obama denies Trump’s ‘bizarre allegations’ that he was...

July 23, 2025

REAL ID deadline comes and goes – airports...

May 8, 2025

Trump, Harris dead even in national poll, with...

October 25, 2024

TikTok divestment could be ‘deal of the century’...

December 23, 2024

Scoop: Trump HHS secretary nominee RFK Jr to...

January 29, 2025

Here’s what happened during President Donald Trump’s 6th...

March 1, 2025

Denmark PM says ‘you cannot spy against an...

May 10, 2025

Recent Posts

  • Trump lashes out at Crockett, renews call for cognitive test
  • Trump goes after Zelenskyy over ‘land swapping’ dispute, lays out ‘feel out meeting’ with Putin
  • Democratic whistleblower told FBI that Adam Schiff approved classified leaks to target Trump
  • MORNING GLORY: Trump meets Putin amid an era done away with John Quincy Adams’ ‘abroad’
  • ‘Things need to change’: Senate Democrats sharpen criticism of Israel as humanitarian concerns grow

    Become a VIP member by signing up for our newsletter. Enjoy exclusive content, early access to sales, and special offers just for you! As a VIP, you'll receive personalized updates, loyalty rewards, and invitations to private events. Elevate your experience and join our exclusive community today!


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Categories

    • Business (867)
    • Investing (2,729)
    • Politics (3,369)
    • Stock (4)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: sightfulinvest.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2024 Sightful Invest. All Rights Reserved.