Connect with us

News

Federal Workers Who Were Fired and Rehired by the Trump Administration

Published

on

Federal Workers Who Were Fired and Rehired by the Trump Administration

Even as the Trump administration continues to slash federal jobs, a number of federal agencies have begun to reverse course — reinstating some workers and pausing plans to dismiss others, sometimes within days of the firings.

Advertisement

Note: Some dates on the chart are approximate, based on available information.

The Office of Personnel Management on Tuesday revised earlier guidance calling for probationary workers to be terminated, adding a disclaimer that agencies would have the final authority over personnel actions. It is unclear how many more workers could be reinstated as a result.

Advertisement

Here’s a look at some of the back-and-forths so far:

Rehiring Some Essential Workers

Trump-appointed officials fired, then scrambled to rehire some employees in critical jobs in health and national security.

Advertisement

Workers reviewing food safety and medical devices

Advertisement

Around Feb. 15 The Food and Drug Administration fired about 700 probationary employees, many of whom were not paid through taxpayer money.

Advertisement

Workers involved in bird flu response

Advertisement
icon Around Feb. 14 The Department of Agriculture continued plans to fire thousands of employees, including hundreds in a plant and animal inspection program.
icon Days later The agency said it was trying to reverse the firings of some employees involved in responding to the nation’s growing bird flu outbreak.

Workers who maintain the U.S. nuclear arsenal

Advertisement

icon Feb. 13 The Energy Department began laying off 1,000 of its probationary employees, including more than 300 who worked at the National Nuclear Security Administration, which maintains and secures the country’s nuclear warheads. A spokesperson for the Energy Department disputed that number, saying fewer than 50 at the N.N.S.A. were fired.

Rehired After Political Pushback

Advertisement

Public opposition from both Democrats and Republicans has also resulted in some fired workers getting called back.

Advertisement

Workers managing a 9/11 survivors’ health program

icon Around Feb. 15 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cut hundreds of employees, including 16 probationary workers who manage the World Trade Central Health Program, which administers aid to people who were exposed to hazards from the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
icon Several days later After bipartisan pushback, the Trump administration said that fired employees would return to their jobs.

Advertisement

Scientific researchers, including military veterans

Advertisement
icon Feb. 18 The National Science Foundation fired 168 employees, or roughly 10 percent of its work force.
icon Less than two weeks later The foundation began reversing dismissals of 84 probationary employees, in response to a ruling by a federal judge and guidance from the Office of Personnel Management to retain the employment of military veterans and military spouses.

Temporary Reinstatements and Pauses on Firings

The firing spree has prompted a slew of lawsuits, which in some cases have resulted in temporary reversals.

Advertisement

Employees at a federal financial watchdog

Advertisement
icon Feb. 11 Officials fired almost 200 employees at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a financial industry watchdog, and ordered the rest to stop their work.

Advertisement

Employees at an international aid department

icon A day later A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to temporarily halt the layoffs.
icon Two weeks later The judge ruled that the administration could proceed with plans to lay off or put on paid leave many agency employees. U.S.A.I.D. moved to fire around 2,000 U.S.-based workers and put up to thousands of foreign service officers and others on paid leave.

Workers from multiple agencies have also filed complaints with the office of a government watchdog lawyer who himself has been targeted by Mr. Trump for termination. In response to requests from that office, an independent federal worker board has considered some of the claims and temporarily reinstated some workers.

Advertisement

Workers at the Agriculture Department

Advertisement

icon Feb. 13 The Agriculture Department began cutting thousands of jobs, including around 3,400 in the Forest Service.
icon Three weeks later The Merit Systems Protection Board issued a stay ordering the department to reinstate fired workers while an investigation continued.

Advertisement

Six workers from six federal agencies

Advertisement
icon Feb. 14 The Office of Personnel Management sent an email ordering federal agencies to fire tens of thousands of probationary employees.
icon Less than two weeks later The Merit Systems Protection Board temporarily reinstated six fired federal workers from the Departments of Agriculture, Education, Energy, Housing and Urban Development and Veterans Affairs, and the Office of Personnel Management.

The back-and-forth and lack of transparency surrounding the administration’s cost-cutting moves have deepened the confusion and alarm of workers across the federal government at large, many of whom also have to interpret confusing email guidance and gauge the veracity of various circulating rumors.

“The layoffs and then rehires undermine the productivity and confidence not only of the people who left and came back but of the people who stayed,” said Stephen Goldsmith, an urban policy professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School and a former mayor of Indianapolis.

Advertisement

Are you a federal worker? We want to hear from you.

The Times would like to hear about your experience as a federal worker under the second Trump administration. We may reach out about your submission, but we will not publish any part of your response without contacting you first.

Advertisement

News

What to know about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody

Published

on

What to know about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody

BALTIMORE — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation helped galvanize opposition to President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, was released from immigration detention on Thursday, and a judge has temporarily blocked any further efforts to detain him.

Abrego Garcia currently can’t be deported to his home country of El Salvador thanks to a 2019 immigration court order that found he had a “well founded fear” of danger there. However, the Trump administration has said he cannot stay in the U.S. Over the past few months, government officials have said they would deport him to Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana and, most recently, Liberia.

Abrego Garcia is fighting his deportation in federal court in Maryland, where his attorneys claim the administration is manipulating the immigration system to punish him for successfully challenging his earlier deportation.

Here’s what to know about the latest developments in the case:

Abrego Garcia is a Salvadoran citizen with an American wife and child who has lived in Maryland for years. He immigrated to the U.S. illegally as a teenager to join his brother, who had become a U.S. citizen. In 2019, an immigration judge granted him protection from being deported back to his home country.

Advertisement

While he was allowed to live and work in the U.S. under Immigration and Customs Enforcement supervision, he was not given residency status. Earlier this year, he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, despite the earlier court ruling.

When Abrego Garcia was deported in March, he was held in a notoriously brutal Salvadoran prison despite having no criminal record.

The Trump administration initially fought efforts to bring him back to the U.S. but eventually complied after the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in. He returned to the U.S. in June, only to face an arrest warrant on human smuggling charges in Tennessee. Abrego Garcia was held in a Tennessee jail for more than two months before he was released on Friday, Aug. 22, to await trial in Maryland under home detention.

His freedom lasted a weekend. On the following Monday, he reported to the Baltimore immigration office for a check-in and was immediately taken into immigration custody. Officials announced plans to deport him to a series of African countries, but they were blocked by an order from U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland.

On Thursday, after months of legal filings and hearings, Xinis ruled that Abrego Garcia should be released immediately. Her ruling hinged on what was likely a procedural error by the immigration judge who heard his case in 2019.

Advertisement

Normally, in a case like this, an immigration judge will first issue an order of removal. Then the judge will essentially freeze that order by issuing a “withholding of removal” order, according to Memphis immigration attorney Andrew Rankin.

In Abrego Garcia’s case, the judge granted withholding of removal to El Salvador because he found Abrego Garcia’s life could be in danger there. However, the judge never took the first step of issuing the order of removal. The government argued in Xinis’ court that the order of removal could be inferred, but the judge disagreed.

Without a final order of removal, Abrego Garcia can’t be deported, Xinis ruled.

The only way to get an order of removal is to go back to immigration court and ask for one, Rankin said. But reopening the immigration case is a gamble because Abrego Garcia’s attorneys would likely seek protection from deportation in the form of asylum or some other type of relief.

One wrinkle is that immigration courts are officially part of the executive branch, and the judges there are not generally viewed as being as independent as federal judges.

Advertisement

“There might be independence in some areas, but if the administration wants a certain result, by all accounts it seems they’re going to exert the pressure on the individuals to get that result,” Rankin said. “I hope he gets a fair shake, and two lawyers make arguments — somebody wins, somebody loses — instead of giving it to an immigration judge with a 95% denial rate, where everybody in the world knows how it’s gonna go down.”

Alternatively, the government could appeal Xinis’ order to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and try to get her ruling overturned, Rankin said. If the appeals court agreed with the government that the final order of removal was implied, there could be no need to reopen the immigration case.

In compliance with Xinis’ order, Abrego Garcia was released from immigration detention in Pennsylvania on Thursday evening and allowed to return home for the first time in months. However, he was also told to report to an immigration officer in Baltimore early the next morning.

Fearing that he would be detained again, his attorneys asked Xinis for a temporary restraining order. Xinis filed that order early Friday morning. It prohibits immigration officials from taking Abrego Garcia back into custody, at least for the time being. A hearing on the issue could happen as early as next week.

Meanwhile, in Tennessee, Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty in the criminal case where he is charged with human smuggling and conspiracy to commit human smuggling.

Advertisement

Prosecutors claim he accepted money to transport, within the United States, people who were in the country illegally. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee for speeding. Body camera footage from a Tennessee Highway Patrol officer shows a calm exchange with Abrego Garcia. There were nine passengers in the car, and the officers discussed among themselves their suspicions of smuggling. However, Abrego Garcia was eventually allowed to continue driving with only a warning.

Abrego Garcia has asked U.S. District Court Judge Waverly Crenshaw to dismiss the smuggling charges on the grounds of “selective or vindictive prosecution.”

Crenshaw earlier found “some evidence that the prosecution against him may be vindictive” and said many statements by Trump administration officials “raise cause for concern.” Crenshaw specifically cited a statement by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on a Fox News Channel program that seemed to suggest the Justice Department charged Abrego Garcia because he won his wrongful-deportation case.

The two sides have been sparring over whether senior Justice Department officials, including Blanche, can be required to testify in the case.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Afghan CIA fighters face stark reality in the U.S. : Consider This from NPR

Published

on

Afghan CIA fighters face stark reality in the U.S. : Consider This from NPR

A makeshift memorial stands outside the Farragut West Metro station on December 01, 2025 in Washington, DC. Two West Virginia National Guard troops were shot blocks from the White House on November 26.

Heather Diehl/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Heather Diehl/Getty Images

They survived some of the Afghanistan War’s most grueling and treacherous missions. 

But once they evacuated to the U.S., many Afghan fighters who served in “Zero Units” found themselves spiraling. 

Among their ranks was Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the man charged with killing one National Guard member and seriously injuring a second after opening fire on them in Washington, D.C. on Thanksgiving Eve.

Advertisement

NPR’s Brian Mann spoke to people involved in Zero Units and learned some have struggled with mental health since coming to the U.S. At least four soldiers have died by suicide. 

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

This episode was produced by Erika Ryan and Karen Zamora. It was edited by Alina Hartounian and Courtney Dorning.

Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Video: Behind the Supreme Court’s Push to Expand Presidential Power

Published

on

Video: Behind the Supreme Court’s Push to Expand Presidential Power

new video loaded: Behind the Supreme Court’s Push to Expand Presidential Power

For more than a decade, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority has chipped away at Congress’s power to insulate independent agencies from politics. Now, the court has signaled its willingness to expand presidential power once again.

By Ann E. Marimow, Claire Hogan, Stephanie Swart and Pierre Kattar

December 12, 2025

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending