Connect with us

Politics

Trump’s Moves to Upend Federal Bureaucracy Touch Off Fear and Confusion

Published

on

Trump’s Moves to Upend Federal Bureaucracy Touch Off Fear and Confusion

An Education Department employee was attending a funeral this week when she got the call: She was being placed on administrative leave because she works on projects that connect Black students, among others, to federal government programs.

A disabled veteran employed at the Department of Veterans Affairs grew emotional when he heard about the rescinding of telework options, unsure whether it would mean the end of his job taking care of fellow soldiers.

A Federal Trade Commission employee was so anxious that he told family members not to talk about politics on unencrypted lines. Across government agencies, workers eyed one another nervously, wondering whether a colleague would report them, accusing them of resisting the new administration’s move to end certain programs.

President Trump’s rapid push to overhaul the federal bureaucracy in his first days in office has been met with a mix of fear, fury and confusion throughout the work force.

Dozens of employees across the government, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because of worries of retribution, described agencies gripped with uncertainty about how to implement the new policies and workers frantically trying to assess the impact on their careers and families. As the nation’s largest employer, the upheaval in the federal government could reverberate in communities throughout the country.

Advertisement

Starting on Inauguration Day, the orders and memos came down one after the other, many crafted in the pugnacious tone of a campaign speech: the shuttering of “Radical and Wasteful” diversity programs in federal agencies; the stripping of civil service protections from a share of the federal work force; the end to remote work, which, one administration memo claimed, had left federal office buildings “mostly empty” and rendered downtown Washington “a national embarrassment.”

All new hiring was frozen, job offers were rescinded, scientific meetings were canceled and federal health officials were temporarily barred from communicating with the public, a directive that some understood as so broad that it even extended to making outside purchase orders for lab supplies.

For the more than two million federal workers, roughly four-fifths of whom live outside the Washington area, change is inevitable whenever a new administration takes over. But few had expected it to come at this speed and scale.

“They are being upended in the most brutal and traumatic way imaginable,” said Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service, a nonprofit that works to promote excellence and best practices in the federal government. Mr. Stier said he had deep concerns about the consequences of Mr. Trump’s swift changes on the ability of the country to face a range of threats, from terrorism to pandemics.

An ambition to change things is reasonable, he said. But “the speed is unnecessary and destructive,” he added.

Advertisement

Federal employees looked to their supervisors for guidance, but said they often had none to give, as they tried to interpret brief orders and memos with few specifics. For example, the return-to-office memo said employees with a disability could be exempt, but it was unclear what kind of disability might qualify. Some managers said they knew nothing beyond what was in the news. Adding to the panic were remarks by the president himself, who suggested on Friday that he might consider shuttering the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which employs 20,000 workers around the country.

A spokesperson from the Office of Personnel Management defended the actions in a statement, calling them “exciting steps to build a federal work force based on merit, excellence and accomplishment, so we can have a government that serves the public effectively and efficiently.”

“We have already saved millions of hard-earned taxpayer dollars that are no longer directed to DEIA programs that wasted millions of hard-earned taxpayer dollars and discriminated against federal workers,” the statement said, referring to diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility efforts.

Donald F. Kettl, an emeritus professor at the University of Maryland who studies the civil service, said there was widespread consensus among experts that the civil service is in need of changes.

“It’s too hard to hire, it’s too tough to fire, and there’s too little match between the civil service system and the capacity government needs to handle 21st-century challenges,” Dr. Kettl said.

Advertisement

But he said that many of the Trump administration’s proposed changes would be counterproductive. “They’re focused much more on shifting the balance of power than they are on improving the results of government,” he said.

Inside federal offices, the mood has been tense and anticipatory. One employee at the Homeland Security Department said the staff felt at risk of being fired at any moment. At the Commerce Department, employees were terrified whenever a meeting was called, one worker said.

The isolation is deepened, some federal employees said, by the fact that most of their fellow Americans see the federal government as bloated and inefficient. Some said that reform, if it were well thought-out, would be healthy and welcome. But many noted that they had accepted significant pay cuts to work for the government because they believe in public service — issuing Social Security checks, keeping air travel safe and inspecting food, among other roles.

“The reality is that the American economy needs my agency’s work,” said Colin Smalley, a geologist with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the president of his local of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers. “We keep construction projects going, ports and waterways open, power grids functioning, and we protect communities from natural disasters and help affected communities recover. Hurting our mission hurts the public.”

Compounding the anxiety was a directive from the Office of Personnel Management instructing agency heads to turn over by Jan. 24 names of those who were still in their probationary period, typically within one or two years of their hiring.

Advertisement

The directive noted that such employees “can be terminated during that period without triggering appeal rights,” and that managers should determine whether they should be retained, according to a copy obtained by The New York Times.

Jacqueline Simon, the policy director for the American Federation of Government Employees, which has about 300,000 active members across dozens of agencies, said that attempts to terminate federal employees still in their probationary periods could have damaging effects on government services.

For example, she said, employees of the Food Safety and Inspection Service, who work in meat and poultry plants to prevent diseased animals and other contaminants from entering the food supply, frequently leave within a year because the job is so depleting.

“It’s not a job you stay in long,” Ms. Simon said, calling the work “dirty and dangerous.” If the Trump administration were to remove everyone in the service who was still on probation, she added, there would be a severe shortage of inspectors at meat processing plants.

An attorney at a federal enforcement agency said he works on a team of more than a dozen lawyers, more than half of whom are still in their probationary period. If the team were to lose all of its members still on probation, the attorney said, it would be “catastrophic” for the team’s ability to shoulder its law enforcement responsibilities.

Advertisement

One of the most sweeping changes made by Mr. Trump in his first week was to order federal workers back to the office full time by later next month, ending years of a flexible telecommuting policy, which in many offices dated to well before the pandemic. For some who want to keep working for the government, this could mean selling homes, changing children’s schools and moving hundreds of miles in a matter of weeks. New mothers are debating whether they will be able to return from maternity leave, and couples have been forced to choose who gets to keep their current jobs.

Many offices do not currently have enough room for all of the employees to come back. This, some contend, is the whole point. Shortly after the November election, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the men tapped by Mr. Trump to remake the government, wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed: “Requiring federal employees to come to the office five days a week would result in a wave of voluntary terminations that we welcome.”

“I think we know where it looks like he’s trying to go, which is to force people to quit,” said Representative Glenn F. Ivey of Maryland, a Democrat whose district is home to tens of thousands of federal workers. “They’re going to try and force a lot of federal employees out of work, and then replace them with political loyalists.”

The administration’s efforts are already being challenged in court by unions and other groups, who argue, among other things, that the lifting of civil service protections runs afoul of laws governing federal workers.

Among the first to feel the direct impact of the president’s new policies were employees working on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and programming. Mr. Trump ordered the immediate shutdown of all such offices, with their staff placed on administrative leave by Wednesday at 5 p.m. Agencies were ordered to draw up plans to lay them off by Jan. 31. The administration also threatened employees with “adverse consequences” if they failed to report on colleagues who defy the orders within 10 days, setting up a special email account for such reports.

Advertisement

The Education Department employee who was placed on leave while she was at a funeral said she had worked on an acclaimed program connecting students with scholarships and industry leaders, and helped Black people tap into government programs they often did not know existed. In various communications, the Trump administration has called such efforts “harmful” and “wasteful.”

“I guess if that’s harmful, then I’m proud of providing that harm — empowering the community to be better because we are brilliant,” she said. “We just don’t have the access to generational wealth and nepotism that they have, so we have to teach people how to make it for themselves.”

In a work force that is nearly 20 percent Black, many employees said there could be another consequence of the moves: making the federal government whiter and less diverse.

By the end of the week, some employees said wearily that they did not know how long they could hang on. Many described conditions as reminiscent of the McCarthy era, and were despondent to see how quickly their office’s leaders acquiesced.

At the Department of Labor, staff members watched a colleague who had been recently hired to a civil service position be escorted out because she was a former political appointee. One employee said her manager required her to scrub the website not only of the words “diversity, equity and inclusion,” as the executive order required, but also of references to “underserved” and “marginalized communities.” Afterward, she said, she went into a closet, called her mother and wept.

Advertisement

On Tuesday morning, Moriah Lee, an analyst at NASA, joined a virtual town hall to learn what all the orders would mean for her small team, which monitors and audits projects in the space program. The acting supervisors, people she had known personally for years, made it clear to everyone that they were not inclined to show flexibility, she said.

Gone was the weekly speaker series that had been organized under the diversity program, which had brought in deaf people, combat veterans and others to share their experiences. Gone was her ability to live in Nashville and go twice a month to an office two hours away in Huntsville, Ala.

After the meeting, she and her colleagues went back to their jobs. They were rattled, she said, but not afraid. “The people who are acting most in fear are the ones in authority,” she said.

But the change to remote work, combined with the other directives, was just too much for her. And so Ms. Lee sent in her notice: Nearly six years after she began working for the federal government, she was resigning.

Kate Kelly, Hamed Aleaziz and Sheryl Gay Stolberg contributed reporting from Washington.

Advertisement

Politics

Social media erupts over Mamdani’s silence after Brooklyn coffee shop bans Jewish congressman

Published

on

Social media erupts over Mamdani’s silence after Brooklyn coffee shop bans Jewish congressman

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is facing swift backlash after declining to condemn a local coffee chain that told a Jewish congressman with pro-Israel views that he was not welcome.

Advertisement

Mamdani has remained silent after the Williamsburg, Brooklyn-based Poetica coffee shop posted — and later deleted — a message on social media telling Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., not to return after he stopped by the shop with his daughter Monday. The mayor declined to comment through a spokesman when contacted by The New York Times on Monday.

“Shameful,” Fox News Radio analyst Josh Kraushaar wrote on social media in response to a section of The Times story detailing that Mamdani declined to comment.

“Well folks, we’ve reached the stage of antisemitism where Jews are being publicly barred from businesses,” the CEO and co-founder of the antisemitism-focused nonprofit Boundless Israel said on X. “A coffee shop in Mamdani’s New York City told Jewish Congressman Dan Goldman he wasn’t welcome in their store.”

Zohran Mamdani announces new members of his team at the Brooklyn Public Library Greenpoint Branch in Brooklyn on Dec. 17, 2025. (Shawn Inglima/New York Daily News/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)

MAMDANI SKIPS ISRAEL DAY PARADE DESPITE JOINING OTHER CULTURAL CELEBRATIONS

Advertisement

“The café is implementing Mamdani’s wishes,” journalist Melissa Braunstein said.

Fox News Digital reached out to Mamdani’s office for comment but did not immediately hear back.

In a since-deleted social media post, Poetica Coffee said it would have declined to serve Goldman had staff recognized him in the store. Goldman has notably declined to characterize Israel’s war in Gaza as a genocide and has received financial contributions from the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC, drawing criticism from some on the progressive left. 

“Hey Congressman Dan Goldman, we see that you stopped by our shop today for a coffee. Do you see how it doesn’t taste like genocide juice? Or are you still having a hard time telling the difference?” the post said.

“See, here at Poetica, we don’t serve racists, fascists, homophobes, genocide enablers, or anyone in between,” the post continued. “Too bad we didn’t recognize you right away, or we would have turned you away. We issued you a refund—we don’t need your money (it’s probably coming from AIPAC anyways). Enjoy your loss on Tuesday. Don’t ever come to Poetica.”

Advertisement

The coffee chain has since deleted its Instagram page amid social media backlash.

Mamdani’s silence comes as he is working to unseat Goldman, despite the incumbent lawmaker being a leading Trump critic and embracing an array of leftist legislative proposals. Goldman notably did not endorse Mamdani’s mayoral campaign, citing concerns about how his administration would approach Jewish New Yorkers.

A Brooklyn, N.Y., coffee shop refunded a purchase made by Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., over the weekend over his support for Israel, saying the company doesn’t serve “genocide enablers.” (Getty Images; Google Maps)

The mayor publicly backed former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander to represent Goldman’s district, which spans Lower Manhattan and deep-blue, wealthy pockets of Brooklyn.

Democratic voters will decide whether to hand Goldman a third House term during the Empire State’s primary elections on Tuesday.

Advertisement

NY DEM WOULDN’T BACK MAMDANI FOR MAYOR — NOW MAMDANI IS BACKING HIS CHALLENGER

Since both men largely hold the same policy stances, the bruising primary battle has revolved around support for Israel — with Lander vowing to elevate the Palestinian cause if elected to the House.

Goldman has notably supported military aid to Israel following Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks and distanced himself from inflammatory rhetoric used by some on the left to criticize Israel.

Goldman offered a tempered response after the coffee chain effectively banned him from their storefronts.

“I’m sorry to see this post,” he said. “The barista could not have been nicer to my 7-year-old daughter and me—allowing her to use the bathroom even though we had not purchased anything. I made sure to buy a coffee in return for her kindness. I hope you at least make sure she gets the tip that she deserved.” 

Advertisement

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani speaks in support of Brad Lander, Democratic candidate for Congress in New York’s 10th Congressional District, in Carroll Park in the Carroll Gardens neighborhood of Brooklyn on June 14, 2026. (Shuran Huang/For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said Tuesday her office has opened an investigation into the matter.

“Federal law prohibits public accommodations such as coffee shops from discriminating against patrons based on their race, religion, or national origin,” Dhillon wrote. “These actions are not only reprehensible, they’re potentially illegal.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Battle over single-use plastics erupts as 17 states move to block California law

Published

on

Battle over single-use plastics erupts as 17 states move to block California law

Attorneys general in seventeen states are suing California over its landmark single-use plastic law, which went into effect on June 1.

The lawsuit comes after a coalition of environmental groups sued the state over the same law this month, arguing the new final regulations create loopholes so large they gut the law.

The states are led by Nebraska Atty. Gen. Mike Hilgers, and the plaintiffs include the National Assn. of Wholesaler-Distributors. The coalition is asking the court to block enforcement of the law immediately.

“Once again, California is trying to enact a policy that negatively impacts the rest of the country,” said Hilgers in a news release. “If California goes unchecked, consumers will be forced to pay more for basic necessities.”

The other states in the coalition are Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and West Virginia. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court of Eastern California in Sacramento on Monday.

Advertisement

State Senate Bill 54, the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act, was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2022. It was considered landmark legislation because it requires plastic and packaging companies to use less single-use plastic and ensure by 2032 that all food packaging is either recyclable or compostable.

Accumulating plastic waste is overwhelming waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.

The intent was not only to reduce single=use plastic, but also to put the onus and cost of dealing with it on packaging producers and manufacturers, not consumers and local governments. It was supposed to incentivize companies to consider the fate of their products and spur innovation in material redesign.

Plastic bottles of dishwashing liquid at Compton’s Market in Sacramento on June 17, 2022.

(Rich Pedroncelli/AP)

Advertisement

According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed during 2023 in California.

The single-use plastic law is what is known as a producer responsibility law. It emphasizes the idea of a “circular economy” in which the producer of a material must consider its fate — making sure it can be reused or recycled, or at least reduced.

In California, all producers of single-use packaging and plastic foodware (plates, knives, spoons, etc.) join a private entity known as a producer responsibility organization. Only one such organization has been approved in California: the Circular Action Alliance.

The states and the National Assn. of Wholesaler-Distributors say the plastic law discriminates against businesses selling into the state in two ways: by making them change or alter their plastic packaging and by conferring government authority upon the alliance, enabling a private entity to regulate and impose taxes and fees on businesses selling into California.

Advertisement

“California is not entitled to pronounce nationwide policies,” Eric Hoplin, president and chief executive of the wholesalers group, said in a statement. “Because the Act extends California’s regulatory reach far beyond its borders and brings within its sweep conduct wholly unconnected to California, the Act violates principles of federalism, the horizontal separation of powers, and due process.”

In addition, the attorneys general say the law suppresses their free speech by compelling companies to join and fund the speech of an organization with which they may disagree.

Hoplin and his organization filed a similar suit in Oregon in February. Oregon has a comparable single-use plastic law. A federal judge blocked enforcement of that law. A trial begins on July 13.

Heidi Sanborn, executive director and CEO of the National Stewardship Action Council, which advocates for the producer responsibility laws and a more circular economy, said in May that both SB 54 and the Oregon law are public policies that were “passed by legislatures and implemented with government oversight.”

She said the laws create clear and consistent rules so all producers contribute fairly to the cost of recycling and waste management.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, environmental groups are also unhappy.

On June 2, Oceana, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Californians Against Waste Foundation filed a lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court.

They allege that the final regulations for the law, drafted and approved by the state’s waste agency, include exclusions for large categories of plastic packaging that companies could use indefinitely. In addition, they say, the regulations also allow for recycling technologies that pollute, such as chemical recycling, which the law as originally drafted forbids.

“While SB 54 remains a monumental achievement as the nation’s strongest single-use plastic reduction law, some of the final regulations implementing the statute undermine the law’s ambitions,” Christy Leavitt, Oceana’s senior campaign director, said in a statement.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

DOJ investigating NYC coffee shop over hostile social post about pro-Israel politician

Published

on

DOJ investigating NYC coffee shop over hostile social post about pro-Israel politician

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Department of Justice (DOJ) says it has opened an investigation into a New York City coffee shop after it blasted Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., in a social media post, saying it should not have served him, and he should never come back due to his support of Israel. 

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said the DOJ has opened an investigation into the Poetica Coffee Shop in Brooklyn.

Dhillon says the department is aware of the “denial of service taunts” directed at Goldman and says federal law prohibits public accommodations, including coffee shops, from discriminating against patrons based on race, religion, or national origin. Dhillon says the alleged denial of service could violate federal anti-discrimination law and says enforcement action is possible.

In a now-deleted Facebook post, Poetica Coffee said it issued a refund to Goldman after learning that he had stopped by the location with his young daughter. The shop added that it would have simply turned Goldman away if staff had recognized him at the time.

Advertisement

SMOOTHIE KING FIRES EMPLOYEES WHO REFUSED TO SERVE CUSTOMERS OVER TRUMP SWEATSHIRT

Rep. Dan Goldman, D, N.Y., was criticized by Poetica, a left-leaning coffee shop in Brooklyn, which called  scolded him over his support for Israel.  (Dan Goldman)

“Hey Congressman Dan Goldman, we see that you stopped by our shop today for a coffee. Do you see how it doesn’t taste like genocide juice? Or are you still having a hard time telling the difference?” the post stated, referring to Goldman’s support for Israel and accusations that the Jewish state has committed genocide against Palestinians during the war in Gaza.

“See, here at Poetica, we don’t serve racists, fascists, homophobes, genocide enablers, or anyone in between,” the post continued. “Too bad we didn’t recognize you right away, or we would have turned you away. We issued you a refund—we don’t need your money (it’s probably coming from AIPAC anyways). Enjoy your loss on Tuesday. Don’t ever come to Poetica.”

A Brooklyn, N.Y., coffee shop refunded a purchase made by Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., over the weekend over his support for Israel, saying the company doesn’t serve “genocide enablers.” (Getty Images; Google Maps)

Advertisement

In a statement on social media, Goldman said he was disappointed by the shop’s remarks.

“I’m sorry to see this post,” he said. “The barista could not have been nicer to my 7-year-old daughter and me—allowing her to use the bathroom even though we had not purchased anything. I made sure to buy a coffee in return for her kindness. I hope you at least make sure she gets the tip that she deserved.”

In response, the shop said it was the barista’s idea to refund Goldman’s purchase. The poster added that they will be voting against Goldman, who faces a Democratic primary challenge from former city Comptroller Brad Lander.

DEMOCRATIC REP FEARS PARTY TURNING ANTISEMITIC PROTESTERS INTO ‘MARTYRS’ IN BATTLE AGAINST TRUMP DEPORTATIONS

Fox News Digital has reached out to Goldman and the coffee shop, as well as the offices of New York State Attorney General Letitia James and Mayor Zohran Mamdani, and the city’s Department of Consumer and Worker Protection.

Advertisement

“No comment. We stand against genocide,” a staffer told the New York Post.

The shop’s social media post was quickly criticized online.

Mark Treyger, the CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York, said the incident warrants a review under city and state human rights laws.

MAMDANI IN THE HOT SEAT AFTER FIRST VETO DERAILS BIPARTISAN EFFORT TO COMBAT ANTISEMITISM: ‘DISAPPOINTED’

Poetica Coffee in Brooklyn, N.Y., criticized Rep. Dan Goldman, N.Y., over his support for Israel.  (Dan Goldman)

Advertisement

“Turning a cup of coffee into a Jewish identity litmus test is an affront to the law, our values, and every New Yorker who rejects discrimination,” he wrote on X. “If an identifiable Jewish customer walks into a coffee shop wearing a kippah or Magen David, are they expected to first disclose their views on Middle East policy before being served?”

The incident appears to contradict the opening statement on Poetica Coffee’s website by its owner, Parviz Mukhamadkulov, an Uzbek immigrant who opened his first location in 2020.

“In practice, it looks like a café where the door doesn’t close on anyone, where tea gets poured before anyone asks who you are,” the website states. “The guest is sacred because the act of welcoming is how a community keeps itself intact.”

Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., stands outside the Delaney Hall Detention Center in Newark, New Jersey, on May 28, 2026. (Rashid Umar Abbasi for Fox News Digital.)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

The shop also claims on its site that “whoever walks through the door is treated with unconditional dignity.”

“Not as a customer. Not as a transaction. As someone who arrived and deserves to be welcomed,” the site reads.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending