Context:

A federal judge in San Francisco is likely to temporarily block President Trump's extensive government restructuring efforts due to a lawsuit filed by labor unions, nonprofits, and local governments, arguing these changes are unconstitutional without Congress's approval. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston indicated that significant changes to federal agencies need congressional cooperation, and the plaintiffs are seeking a temporary restraining order to halt further implementation of planned mass layoffs. The Trump administration contends that the delay in filing the lawsuit renders the request for a restraining order inappropriate, arguing that the president has inherent authority over the execution of laws. Plaintiffs claim the administration's secrecy has obstructed judicial review, and Judge Illston is unconvinced by the government's argument that the court lacks jurisdiction. The executive order in question, issued by Trump, directed agencies to prepare for layoffs and program closures, with instructions reportedly influenced by Elon Musk's DOGE team and other government offices, though these actions are defended as being consistent with applicable law by the administration.

Dive Deeper:

• Judge Susan Illston is poised to issue a temporary restraining order against President Trump's government restructuring plan, which labor unions, nonprofits, and local governments claim violates constitutional requirements for congressional approval.

• The plaintiffs argue that Trump's executive order directing mass layoffs and program closures lacks the necessary congressional cooperation, pointing to the secrecy of the administration's implementation process as a barrier to judicial review.

• The Trump administration, through Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric Hamilton, argues that the plaintiffs' delay in seeking a restraining order undermines their case, asserting that the president has inherent authority over federal law execution.

• Judge Illston questions the appropriateness of handling such a sweeping government overhaul through administrative channels as suggested by the government, indicating skepticism about the claimed lack of jurisdiction.

• The executive order has already prompted agencies like the Departments of Health and Human Services and Veterans Affairs to initiate actions not based on independent analysis but on directives from Trump's administration, including Elon Musk's DOGE team.

• Plaintiffs, including the American Federation of Government Employees and major cities, seek to halt the restructuring plans that are seen as undermining the legislative branch's power and lacking transparency in execution.

• The government's defense rests on the broad directive nature of the executive order, arguing that any actions taken are to remain consistent with applicable law, though plaintiffs argue it mandates immediate action in line with the president's directions.