(CTN News) – In a petition filed with the Supreme Court on Monday, President Trump’s administration urged the court to overturn a ruling that would have required the rehiring of thousands of federal employees who had been laid off as part of a plan to significantly reduce the size of the federal government through mass layoffs.

According to the emergency appeal, the Supreme Court lacks the authority to direct the executive branch to rehire around 16,000 employees who were previously on probation.

Because the judge in California determined that the firings violated federal law, he ordered that reinstatement offers be disseminated while the lawsuit is still pending.

Furthermore, the appeal asks the Supreme Court, which is made up primarily of conservatives, to limit the growing number of federal judges who have temporarily stalled President Donald Trump’s ambitious agenda. The appeal includes a request like this.

“Only this Supreme Court can end the interbranch power grab.”

Given that the Republican-controlled United States Congress has either remained silent or expressed support for President Trump, the federal judiciary system in the United States has been the principal target of opposition to him.

The judicial system has found President Trump’s administration guilty of breaching federal law more than thirty times. These lawsuits were aimed at the administration.

The decisions have addressed a wide range of problems, including, but not limited to, changes to birthright citizenship, the federal government’s spending levels, and transgender individuals’ rights.

During his first term in office, President Trump was crucial in establishing the Supreme Court, which now has three justices. It appears that his remarkable rush of executive orders is being heard on separate days by the court. On the other hand, the majority of the nine-member Supreme Court has made little headway in the two cases it has heard thus far.

Two orders were issued on the same day, one of which being the most recent ruling, which had been appealed to the Supreme Court. Both directions were issued on the same day.

These two convictions addressed various legal matters, including the Republican government’s decision-making procedure surrounding the discharge of probationary personnel.

Judge William Alsup of the United States District Supreme Court for the District of San Francisco ruled that the terminations were carried out due to improper instructions from the Office of Personnel Management and its acting director. He gave orders to rehire staff from six departments: Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Defence, Energy, and Treasury.

He announced his ruling in response to a case filed by a group of trade unions and philanthropic organisations. These groups said that they would be impacted by the reduction in the number of workers available.

Following the complaint, he made his decision.

Alsup, who was nominated by Democratic President Bill Clinton, expressed his displeasure with what he described as the government’s attempt to fire probationary employees with fewer legal protections in order to circumvent the laws and regulations governing staff reductions, which the government is permitted to do.

Alsup’s statement was in response to the fact that the government is authorized to do this. Alsup identifies as a Democrat.

He went on to say that he was taken aback when he discovered that employees had been advised that they were being fired for poor performance, despite the fact that their assessments had been favourable just a few months prior.

The federal government, on the other hand, claims that the Supreme Court has the authority to issue such a sweeping order requiring the rehiring of staff beyond what is permitted by law.

The plaintiffs provided no evidence to support their claim that the Office of Personnel Management unlawfully ordered their terminations, and the Department of Justice’s appeal contends that the plaintiffs lacked the legal competence to initiate a complaint.

SOURCE: AP