Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
A federal judge on Tuesday halted the Trump administration’s sweeping plan to downsize and reorganize the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), ruling that the mass layoffs of health workers across multiple agencies were likely illegal and would cause irreparable harm.
In a 58-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Melissa DuBose granted a preliminary injunction sought by attorneys general from 19 states and the District of Columbia, declaring that the administration’s actions violated federal law and overstepped executive authority.
“The executive branch does not have the authority to order, organize, or implement wholesale changes to the structure and function of the agencies created by Congress,” DuBose wrote in the decision.
The ruling blocks the administration from finalizing any of the layoffs announced in March or proceeding with further terminations. HHS must file a status report with the court by July 11.
Scope of the Cuts and Lawsuit
The layoffs, part of a plan branded “Make America Healthy Again,” had already resulted in the termination of more than 10,000 employees and the consolidation of 28 agencies into 15 under the leadership of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
The injunction specifically protects employees in four key areas:
-
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
-
The Center for Tobacco Products within the FDA
-
The Office of Head Start
-
The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation
States argued that Kennedy’s reorganization was “arbitrary and capricious”, lacked congressional approval, and gutted programs vital to public health, including HIV prevention, tobacco control, maternal and infant health, and food and drug safety regulation.
“The intended effect … was the wholesale elimination of many HHS programs that are critical to public health and safety,” the lawsuit stated.
Political and Legal Fallout
All 19 states involved in the lawsuit have Democratic governors, and many of them are also plaintiffs in a separate legal action challenging the administration’s $11 billion cut to public health funding. That suit also secured a preliminary injunction last month.
DuBose found that the states had shown they were likely to win the case and that the impact of the layoffs had already begun to shift financial and programmatic burdens to state governments.
“States have already begun absorbing critical responsibilities and costs due to terminated federal functions,” the judge noted.
Kennedy and the Administration Respond
Kennedy defended the reorganization during a Senate hearing on May 14, saying it aimed to eliminate “chaos and disorganization” within HHS and reduce bureaucratic bloat. He acknowledged, however, that the department had made errors and said up to 20% of fired employees could be reinstated.
Despite criticism from both lawmakers and public health officials, the Trump administration has continued to promote the overhaul as a cost-saving measure aimed at streamlining duplicative federal programs.
A spokesperson for HHS said the department is reviewing the court’s ruling and “will comply with all legal obligations.”
What’s Next
The ruling is a significant blow to the administration’s effort to overhaul public health governance ahead of the 2026 elections. It also sets up a broader confrontation between the executive and judicial branches over the scope of presidential power to restructure federal agencies.
The case may now proceed to a full trial if no settlement is reached. Experts say the ruling underscores growing judicial skepticism of unilateral executive actions, particularly when they reshape agencies without congressional approval.
“This is a clear message: public health governance in the U.S. must follow the law, not just political will,” said Laura Martinez, a legal scholar at Georgetown University.
For now, the judge’s decision restores a measure of stability to the nation’s health infrastructure — at least temporarily — as the legal battle over the future of HHS continues.
