Blog

As Big Labor challenges President Donald Trump’s federal employee buyout order, Republican attorneys general from 22 states came to the administration’s defense late Sunday. 

On Monday, a federal judge in Boston will weigh the legality of the Trump administration’s U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “Fork Directive.” 

Federal employees have until 11:59 p.m. Monday to decide if they are submitting their deferred resignation in return for eight months of paid leave. 

On Feb. 2, 2 million federal employees received an email after business hours closed advising them of a “fork in the road” – they were told they could accept eight months of paid leave if they agreed to resign by Feb. 6. The buyout offer, which came as part of Elon Musk’s effort to reduce federal waste at the Department of Government Efficiency, prompted a swift blow back from federal labor unions, which argued the Fork Directive is unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act and Antideficiency Act and that they will suffer “irreparable harm.”

Montana Attorney General Austen Knudsen – joined by the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and West Virginia – challenged those arguments brought by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations in court.

SENATE DOGE REPUBLICAN PUSHES BILL TO BRING GOVERNMENT COMPUTER SYSTEMS ‘OUT OF THE STONE AGE’

The late Sunday amicus curiae brief filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts said the federal labor unions “complain” about Trump’s executive orders about the federal workforce and allege the president is eliminating offices and programs supported by congressional appropriations, but “do not challenge the authority to issue the Fork Directive or its constitutionality” because “such a challenge would inevitably fail.” 

“Courts should refrain from intruding into the President’s well-settled Article II authority to supervise and manage the federal workforce,” the filing said. “Plaintiffs seek to inject this Court into federal workforce decisions made by the President and his team. The Court can avoid raising any separation of powers concerns by denying Plaintiffs’ relief and allowing the President and his team to manage the federal workforce.” 

The Republican attorneys general asked the court to deny the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order.

The Fork Directive reports that Trump is reforming the federal workforce around four pillars: return to office, performance culture, more streamlined and flexible workforce, and enhanced standards of conduct. It is intended to “improve services that the federal workforce provides to Americans” by “freeing up government resources and revenue to focus on better serving the American people,” the filing said. 

The filing noted that 65,000 federal workers had already accepted the voluntary deferred resignation offer by its original Feb. 6 deadline. 

Protesters rally outside the Theodore Roosevelt Federal Building headquarters of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management on Feb. 5, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Alex Wong/Getty Images / Getty Images)

U.S. District Judge George O’Toole Jr., who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton, on Thursday temporarily blocked the deferred resignation offer until Monday’s hearing, and the Trump administration pushed back the deadline to 11:59 p.m. Monday. 

DOGE CANCELS FUNDING FOR FAUCI MUSEUM EXHIBIT

In a statement, AFGE said the Fork Directive “is the latest attempt by the Trump-Vance administration to implement Project 2025’s dangerous plans to remove career public service workers and replace them with partisan loyalists.” The federal labor union said the directive “amounts to a clear ultimatum to a sweeping number of federal employees: resign now or face the possibility of job loss without compensation in the near future.” 

“We are grateful to the judge for extending the deadline so more federal workers who refuse to show up to the office can take the Administration up on this very generous, once-in-a-lifetime offer,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told NBC News last week.

Further defending the Trump administration, the Republican attorneys general wrote that the Fork Directive – which takes similar language used during Musk’s mass layoffs when he took over Twitter – also is in line with public opinion, citing recent polling supporting that “Americans’ confidence in the federal government has reached depths not seen since the Vietnam War” and that “a majority of Americans believe the federal government is too large, inefficient, and wasteful.” 

The Theodore Roosevelt Federal Building headquarters of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is seen on Feb. 3, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images / Getty Images)

“The American people elected a president who repeatedly made clear his desire for a more efficient, smaller government,” they wrote. “The Fork Directive is consistent with those desires. Thus, when weighing the equitable factors, the public interest weighs strongly against Plaintiffs’ requested relief.” 

The federal labor unions requested a temporary restraining order so that the OPM could review the legal basis of the directive – something the GOP attorneys general said “makes no sense.” 

“If the Fork Directive is unlawful (it’s not), then why are they asking—even in the alternative—for it to be implemented under more relaxed timelines?” they wrote. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The filing also said the plaintiff’s claim of “irreparable harm” in lost membership and revenues did not hold water, arguing that extending the deadline would increase the harm to the unions by allowing additional employees to participate.