U.S. District Judge James Bredar in Baltimore issued a preliminary injunction Tuesday night that protects those workers while the lawsuit continues.

“Only states have sued here, and only to vindicate their interests as states,” Bredar wrote. “They are not proxies for the workers.”

The order requires the 18 agencies originally named in the lawsuit to follow the law in conducting any future reductions in force. Bredar has now added the Defense Department and the Office of Personnel Management to that number.

  • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 day ago

    That matters only if there’s enforcement. Otherwise, judges are just old men in robes ranting and raving about the way the world used to work.

    • Diurnambule@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      That a first step. Nobody will spontaneously defend your right. You have to do it yourself and associate to other people wanting to defend their rights too

  • floo@retrolemmy.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    And what will this judge do when the Trump administration completely ignores his ruling? Because Trump is definitely gonna throw a tantrum and call this judge “an active judge” as an excuse to ignore his ruling and do whatever the hell he wants anyway.

    There is only one way to stop Trump from doing what he’s doing, and it is not by asking nicely.

    • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m tired of seeing this kind of defeatist response to good news. That judge is doing a good job.

      • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        This isn’t defeatism, it’s realism.

        We’re already knee-deep in the constitutional crisis. Admitting that there’s a good chance that Trump will simply ignore the rulings against him isn’t discouraging, it’s radicalizing.

        • Infynis@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Admitting that there’s a good chance that Trump will simply ignore the rulings against him isn’t discouraging, it’s radicalizing.

          That’s not what the above commentor was doing though. They were criticizing the judge for doing their job. That’s also known as “Obeying in advance.” Just because they’ll break the law doesn’t mean it’s not important to uphold the structure.

      • floo@retrolemmy.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Unless you’re hallucinating, I never mentioned the word “defeat”. In fact, I painted a very clear path towards victory.

      • LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I agree with you and appreciate the call out and the positivity. Too many new accounts on Lemmy lately that are commenting negative and defeatist things on positive headlines.