Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Judge clarifies TRO for ‘confus[ed]’ government defendants who had been ordered to stop layoffs, (Oct 20, 2025)

By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.

“Because Defendants expressed an inaccurate interpretation of the TRO provisions,” the order explains, “the Court further clarifies the following language in the October 15, 2025 TRO” in two key ways.

Just two days after the court granted a motion for a TRO sought by labor organizations and their local affiliates, Judge Illston of the Northern District of California had to issue an order clarifying the TRO and modifying it to clearly extend the relief granted to three more unions—National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE), Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and National Association of Government Employees (NAGE).

According to filings by those unions, they represent nearly 200,000 federal employees at several agencies, including DoD, DHHS, DOI, VA, EPA, USDA, DOT, the State Department, Commerce, and GSA. They noted that all three unions represent substantial numbers of employees at the Department of Interior, which they attested was likely to issue RIF notices within days.

First TRO. Mid-week last week, the court had found the plaintiffs were likely to prevail on the merits of their claims under the Administrative Procedure Act that the harms suffered by the federal employees affected by the RIFs are having drastic and imminent public consequences, and that “the government does not ‘suffer by a temporary preservation of the status quo.’” The court accordingly restrained the defendant agencies from, among other things, taking any action to issue any RIF notices, or any further action to administer or implement any RIF notices already issued, to federal employees in any program, project, or activity that includes any bargaining unit or member represented by any plaintiff unions during or because of the federal government shutdown.

Clarification for confusion. “Because Defendants expressed an inaccurate interpretation of the TRO provisions,” however, on Friday the court offered further clarification of the language from the temporary restraining order issued two days earlier, about which the government had “expressed confusion or disagreement.”

To whom it applies. First, it explained, “The phrase ‘federal employees in any PPA (program, project, or activity) that includes any bargaining unit or member represented by any Plaintiff’ includes (a) ‘federal employees in any PPA’ in which Plaintiffs have any members, regardless of whether those members are employed in a bargaining unit that is represented by a Plaintiff; and (b) ‘federal employees in any PPA’ in which any Plaintiff is or was a recognized collective bargaining representative of a bargaining unit prior to or after the issuance of Executive Orders 14251 and 14343, the effect of which is the subject of legal dispute.”

And when. It also explained that the “reference to issuance of RIF notices ‘during or because of the federal government shutdown’ or ‘during a shutdown’ applies to any RIF notices issued on or after October 1, 2025 and before the end of the federal government shutdown, regardless of whether that RIF was planned to occur independent of or before the shutdown.”

More info on RIFS due today. The court also ordered the defendants to make additional disclosures of information. Specifically, it ordered that by today the defendants should file an “accounting of all RIFs actual or imminent, that are enjoined by this TRO,” consistent with the clarifications and modification herein, including by providing agency declarations that identify any RIFs that have been or are being planned or prepared to be issued during the federal government shutdown, and including the information required to be included by the provisions of the October 15, 2025 TRO (“a description of the agency, the number of employees included in the enjoined RIF, and description of the PPAs that Defendants included in the enjoined RIF”).

The case is No. 3:25-cv-08302.

News: LitigationNewsTrends PublicEmployees Layoffs RemediesDamages Procedure WhiteHouseNews AgencyNews LaborNews