Federal judges are speaking out against the Trump administration’s handling of various policies, accusing officials of playing fast and loose with facts. The criticism comes after recent court rulings and hearings on mass firings, banning transgender troops, and freezing foreign assistance.
In San Francisco, U.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled that six federal agencies must reinstate tens of thousands of probationary workers fired without individual reviews. Alsup criticized the Justice Department for providing “sham documents” and an implausible reason for termination.
Similarly, U.S. District Judge James K. Bredar in Maryland rejected the government’s claim that employees were individually reviewed before being fired. Bredar stated it was “not conceivable” that such assessments could be conducted within the given timeframe.
In another case, Justice Department attorneys argued against allowing transgender troops in the military, citing a 2021 military report. However, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes found the evidence mischaracterized and misrepresented data from the study.
The Defense Department highlighted a figure showing 40% of transgender service members were nondeployable at some point during a one-year period. However, Reyes noted that this figure was meaningless without comparison to the overall deployment rate.
Lastly, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ruled that President Trump’s blanket freeze on foreign aid was unconstitutional and lacked a rational connection. The judge ordered the government to pay for aid work completed by contractors but did not require them to restart canceled contracts.
These criticisms have raised concerns about the administration’s tactics and potential implications for future cases, including those before the Supreme Court.
Source: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/03/16/judges-reactions-trump-administration-explanations/82403696007