Officials are privately telling departments that ushering in a mass firing during the government shutdown may not be legal.
The Washington Post reported Thursday that senior federal officials are quietly counseling against the order from President Donald Trump.
"Well, the Democrats want to shut it down, so when you shut it down, you have to do layoffs. So, we'll be laying off a lot of people that are going to be very affected and they're Democrats. They're going to be Democrats," said Trump during a press conference on Monday.
Vice President JD Vance echoed the sentiment when speaking to the White House press room on Wednesday.
“We are going to have to lay some people off if the shutdown continues,” Vance claimed. “We don’t like that. We don’t necessarily want to do it, but we’re going to do what we have to do to keep the American people’s essential services continuing to run."
During the shutdown, staff aren't being paid, even if they're essential workers who must still be on hand. The Post noted that Vance didn't go into detail about how layoffs would help maintain federal services.
It appears that it may violate appropriations laws, the Post reported, citing those familiar with the deliberations.
"The officials cautioned that firings — known as RIFs, or reductions in force — could be vulnerable to legal challenges under statutes labor unions cited this week in a lawsuit seeking to block threatened mass layoffs," the report said. "For example, the Antideficiency Act prohibits the federal government from obligating or expending any money not appropriated by Congress. It also forbids incurring new expenses during a shutdown, when funding has lapsed; some federal government officials have concluded the prohibition could extend to the kind of severance payments that accompany reductions in force."
White House Budget Director Russell Vought's office has "repeatedly said mass dismissals would come during a government shutdown," the Post said, noting that plans have been developed for several agencies.
Vought's communications director, Rachel McCauley, said in a written statement to the Post that “issuing RIFs is an excepted activity to fulfill the President’s constitutional authority to supervise and control the Executive Branch, similar to conducting foreign policy.”
However, that contradicts what officials are warning isn't legal. The threats have not resulted in any firings yet, however.
"There is no legal requirement that the government fire employees during a shutdown, and such action has never been taken as a result of a shutdown," said the report.
