In a significant setback for the Trump administration, a federal appeals court has upheld a temporary suspension of an executive order targeting large-scale reductions in the federal workforce.

The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the administration's plea to lift an injunction, which was originally placed by a California judge, stopping the mass dismissals of federal employees, as the BBC reports.

This executive order, signed by President Donald Trump in late February, mandated agency heads to begin systematic workforce reductions across federal agencies as part of broader cost-saving measures.

Court cites executive authority limits

The legal process initiated to challenge the order came to a head earlier this month when a California judge imposed an injunction. According to the judge, the order required a more comprehensive review to ensure its constitutionality.

This halt faced opposition from the Trump administration, which argued that the judiciary was wrongly encroaching on executive powers.

The Department of Government Efficiency spearheaded these cost-cutting measures, assigning Elon Musk to guide the initiative.

The Ninth Circuit Court, based in San Francisco, delivered the result on Friday.

Their decision, passed by a narrow 2-1 margin, emphasized that the executive order overstepped the presidential supervisory powers as dictated by the Constitution.

SCOTUS appeal contemplated

Following the appeals court's ruling, the administration's legal team is contemplating appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The White House expressed its dissatisfaction with the court’s decision, stating that a single judge is inappropriately wielding the executive branch's hiring and firing authorities.

Initially, a coalition comprising federal employee unions, local governments, and nonprofits launched the lawsuit challenging the president's directive. Their primary argument was that such sweeping workforce changes should not proceed without legislative approval.

The administration sought an emergency stay from a San Francisco federal judge, only for it to be denied, indicating that the judicial path forward will be complex and contentious for the administration.

Administration eyes cost savings

Trump’s administration has been rigorously pursuing efforts to slash government expenses. Tens of thousands of federal employees have already faced cuts, buyouts, or been put on leave during his term.

These cost-cutting measures were part of a broader federal efficiency campaign, with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) orchestrating the attempts to streamline operations.

Elon Musk’s involvement in these initiatives highlighted the administration's desire to draw expertise from figures outside the traditional governmental sphere to effectuate substantial financial savings.

Further legal challenges awaited

As the judicial impasse continues, this ruling represents a pause in the administration's plans rather than a full stop. The White House's determination to pursue its agenda through higher legal avenues signals the complexities in marrying executive actions with judicial scrutiny.

In anticipation of possible Supreme Court involvement, the administration underscores its commitment to lowering government expenditures, suggesting that more significant legal battles may lie ahead.

With this ruling, the scope and limits of presidential authority regarding federal employment policies remain a pivotal issue, reflecting the perennial struggle over the separation of powers in U.S. governance.