This cogent order flatly calls out Tangerine 2.0 and Marco Rubio -- for lawless actions. . . each flat-out contrary to existing statutes -- unlawful. Judge Nichols (a Trump 1.0 appointee!) said placing almost 3,000 USAID employees on administrative leave would violate the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024, which requires the State Department and USAID to consult with Congress before, among other things, “reorganiz[ing]” or “redesign[ing]” USAID, including by “downsiz[ing]” it. Pub. L. 118-47 §§ 7063(a), (b), 138 Stat. 460 (2024).
This then is the meat of it:
. . .Taking the TRO factors somewhat out of order and beginning with irreparable injury, the Court finds that plaintiffs have adequately demonstrated that their members are facing irreparable injury from their placement on administrative leave, and that more members would face such injury if they were placed on administrative leave tonight. Many USAID personnel work in “high risk environments where access to security resources is critical.” ECF No. 9-10 ¶ 14. No future lawsuit could undo the physical harm that might result if USAID employees are not informed of imminent security threats occurring in the countries to which they have relocated in the course of their service to the United States. The government argued at the TRO hearing that placing employees on paid administrative leave is a garden-variety personnel action unworthy of court intervention. But administrative leave in Syria is not the same as administrative leave in Bethesda; simply being paid cannot change that fact. . . .
Plaintiffs again have a plausible argument that the expedited evacuations are unlawful (here because, in plaintiffs’ telling, they flow from the ultra vires unilateral closure of USAID’s overseas offices and operations), and the government, while opposing this argument, has not submitted any briefing on the issue. Nor has the government articulated any harm that would result to its interests if it could not continue recalling USAID employees during the next week, while preliminary injunction briefing proceeds.
When the Court asked the government at the TRO hearing what harm would befall the government if it could not immediately place on administrative leave the more than 2000 employees in question, it had no response -- beyond asserting without any record support that USAID writ large was possibly engaging in “corruption and fraud. . . .”
For these reasons, and again in light of plaintiffs’ strong showing of irreparable harm, the Court finds a TRO is warranted. . . .
Gratifying, indeed -- but no sane commander in chief would have ever -- ever -- put US government employees, and citizens in such clear danger, in the first place. Impeach? I dunno. Have to think on that -- because if we succeed, we get. . . Vance. Ick -- more competent than Trump. . . even if only slightly. And that's a bad bargain. Out.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment