A second attempt by government unions to block the firing of government employees by the Trump administration has failed. A federal judge in Washington concluded that the unions did not have standing in the case.

A federal judge on Thursday declined to issue a temporary restraining order pausing President Donald Trump’s moves to fire thousands of employees who are on probationary status or deemed nonessential, clearing a roadblock for the new administration as it attempts sweeping changes to downsize the federal government.

U.S. District Judge Christopher R. Cooper, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, ruled against the National Treasury Employees Union and four other labor organizations that requested a temporary halt to the mass firings. More than half a million federal workers could lose their jobs through the Trump administration’s firings and a separate program of deferred resignations, or buyouts, the unions said in legal filings.

Judge Cooper said the unions would have to take their complaints first to the federal agency that handles such things:

Judge Cooper said that he was denying the unions’ request that he block the Trump administration from continuing its downsizing efforts because the matter should be first addressed with the agency that adjudicates labor disputes between federal employee unions and management, known as the Federal Labor Relations Authority.

Judge Cooper noted that if the unions lose in that venue, they could resume their court battle through the federal court of appeals.

The unions who filed the lawsuit last week in hopes of gumming up the works claimed it was just a "temporary setback."

The union said in court filings that at least 1,250 dues-paying members had been fired and that the union stands to lose “up to half of its revenue and around half of the workers that it represents” if the terminations proceed.

The union stands to lose half it's revenue? That certainly sounds...terrible. How will they continue to support Democratic politicians with only half their revenue? And yes, in case you were wondering, the NTEU gives almost exclusively to Democrats ($528,000 vs. $10,000 in 2024). Other unions behind the lawsuit are similarly part of a Democrats' campaign fund apparatus.

Other plaintiffs include the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE), International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), and the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW).

In any case, they vowed to fight on.

“Already too many federal employees and their families have been devastated by these indiscriminate layoffs, and soon their local economies will feel that pain, too,” the union’s statement said. “There is no doubt that the administration’s actions are an illegal end-run on Congress, which has the sole power to create and oversee federal agencies and their important missions regarding public health and safety, national security, economic growth and stability, and consumer protection.”

I'm not convinced firing probationary employees, who have limited protections to start with, or offering buyouts, which tens of thousands of employees chose to accept, are ever going to be reversed by a court. I guess we'll have to wait and see but so far judges don't seem to be over-eager to help.

Last week a federal judge in Massachusetts lifted a restraining order he had briefly placed on the federal buyout offer after concluding the unions did not have standing to bring the case. That judge was a Clinton appointee. So it seems the unions just aren't making their case despite having friendly judges hearing these cases.

The unions have been doing their best to prevent anyone from accepting the buyouts, claiming the offer itself was illegal or that the Trump administration couldn't be trusted to follow through on its promises. It was pretty obvious from the start that their real goal was to prevent a diminishment of their own power base.