Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Main Menu

American Federation of Government Employees, AFL CIO et al v. United States Office of Management and Budget et al

Court:
Northern District of California
Subject Matter:
Administrative Procedure Act
Procedural Posture:
Motion for Temporary Restraining Order
Last Updated:
  • American Federation of Government Employees, AFL CIO et al v. United States Office of Management and Budget et al
    American Federation of Government Employees, AFL CIO et al v. United States Office of Management and Budget et al
    American Federation of Government Employees, AFL CIO et al v. United States Office of Management and Budget et al, 3:25-cv-08302-SI, Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Administrative Procedure Act, 10/15/2025, 10:30 AM (PDT), Phillip Burton Federal Building, San Francisco, CA, Judge Susan Illston presiding.

    American Federation of Government Employees, AFL CIO et al v. United States Office of Management and Budget et al, 3:25-cv...

Case Summary: 3:25-cv-08302-SI

This case challenges actions by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and Office of Personnel Management (OPM) regarding federal employee layoffs during a potential government shutdown. Labor unions representing federal workers allege that OMB issued an unlawful memorandum directing agencies to use a shutdown as an opportunity to conduct mass reductions in force (RIFs), claiming that programs without funding are "no longer statutorily required" and that agencies can process these RIFs during the shutdown itself. The unions argue this violates the Antideficiency Act and federal RIF procedures because: (1) a temporary funding lapse doesn't eliminate statutory agency obligations, (2) RIF procedures don't apply to shutdown furloughs, which are temporary by nature, and (3) administering RIFs during a shutdown isn't a permitted "excepted" function under the law. The plaintiffs contend these directives are politically motivated, contrary to established law and practice, and arbitrary and capricious, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to block the threatened mass layoffs.

Case Highlights

  • Case highlights for this case is not yet available.

Case-related documents, including those referenced above, are available via the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) service. For more information, visit Pacer.gov.