'Really unusual' new rulings hint at 'long-term problem for the administration': expert
CNN's Elie Honig identified a potential "long-term problem" brewing for Donald Trump's administration in court battles challenging the legality of their actions.
Two judges ordered tens of thousands of federal workers to be reinstated Thursday across 19 agencies, and one of them temporarily restrained the administration from carrying out any further reductions in the workforce, and Honig told "CNN News Central" said they're not likely to win these challenges.
"They keep losing because they keep violating the law," Honig said. "There are laws on the books passed by Congress long ago that essentially say you can fire these probationary employees but you have to do it a certain way. You have two options. One, you can do this complicated administrative process called the reduction in force, or two, you can make a specific showing that that specific employee has performed poorly. Now the two judges yesterday found that the Trump administration either made no effort to comply with those laws or did it but improperly."
ALSO READ: 'Came as a surprise to me': Senators 'troubled' by one aspect of government funding bill
Honig noted the pair of rulings were temporary and could change if the administration went back and followed the law, and he said the decisions would most certainly be appealed.
"Their legal position is those laws passed by Congress, they don't apply to us – Congress cannot tell the president what to do within the executive branch that he was elected to lead," Honig said. "So we're just at the beginning of these disputes. Ultimately, it's going to come down to a question of balance of powers."
However, the legal analyst was struck by the language used by the judges, who referred to the Department of Justice's arguments as almost "frivolous" and a "sham."
"It tells me DOJ has a real credibility problem under this administration," Honig said. "It is really unusual to hear judges use language that pointed. Usually they're sort of more diplomatic. They'll say, 'Well, I have questions about some of the assertions you're making here, counsel.' They're not going to come right out like yesterday and say 'liar' and 'sham' and that kind of thing, and that's really important because when I was at DOJ, we were taught the credibility that you have because you work at DOJ is the most valuable asset you have, and it's really hard to build that up, but it's real easy to lose it, and if judges are starting to doubt the truthfulness of this Justice Department, that's going to be a long-term problem for the administration."
Leave a Comment
Related Post