Fired Without Cause – This Week's Questions Answered (March 10th, 2025)

Mass firings across federal agencies are shaking up the system—some driven by claims of poor performance, others by attempts to dismantle entire institutions. But are these dismissals legal, and what protections do employees actually have?

Today, I’m addressing this critical topic in our public answer:

1. Mass Firings and Legal Remedies – A breakdown of the legal challenges against agency dissolutions and wrongful terminations, and why these cases are heading to the Supreme Court.

As well, for paid subscribers, I’m tackling another pressing issue many of you raised:

2. The Frontal Assault on Media, Defense Counsel, and Academia – How Trump’s escalating attacks threaten First Amendment protections and the independence of key institutions.

And tomorrow, we’re diving into three more critical topics. Stay tuned—these are conversations that shape our democracy.

–Andrew

P.S. If you prefer to watch the public portion on YouTube, click here.

Mass Firings and Legal Remedies

TRANSCRIPT (public)

Hi, folks.

Welcome to this week’s Questions Answered. Thank you so much for sending in your questions—they were excellent.

Rather than answering all five at once, I’ll start this segment by answering one public question, followed by one for paid subscribers.

---

On Mass Firings and Legal Remedies

I received a lot of questions about the ongoing mass firings by this administration. These dismissals are happening across various levels—by individual agencies, by the White House, and most notably by DOGE, as run by Elon Musk.

There’s a side issue here worth flagging. In court, Musk claims he doesn’t run DOGE, but when it’s convenient—like during the State of the Union—he’s suddenly the one in charge. So, we’re seeing a lot of misrepresentations about who’s actually leading DOGE.

But the big question is: What legal remedies exist for these mass firings?

As a lawyer, let me break this down into four main categories.

---

1. Eradicating Entire Agencies

We’ve seen proposals to eliminate entire agencies—like what was attempted with USAID and what’s currently being proposed for the Department of Education.

Here’s the issue: the creation and dissolution of federal agencies is a congressional function. The executive branch doesn’t have the power to simply wipe out an agency that Congress established.

And yes, lawsuits are already underway.

Now, you might expect Congress to push back. But with both the Senate and the House controlled by Republicans, there’s been little to no resistance.

This is why public opinion and polling matter so much—because if lawmakers aren’t going to defend these institutions, the public must demand accountability.

---

2. Firing Probationary Employees

Next, there are firings involving probationary employees—those who’ve been on the job for a year or two.

While it’s easier to terminate probationary employees, the administration still needs a legitimate reason. Mass firings without cause are legally questionable.

Now, here’s a tactic this administration has been using: rather than admitting they’re cutting jobs arbitrarily, they’re claiming these employees were terminated for “bad performance.”

But here’s the problem—there’s extensive reporting suggesting that many of these employees were doing just fine. And if that’s true, these individuals might have two claims:

• Unlawful termination: If the firing wasn’t justified, they can challenge it in court.

• Defamation: If they were falsely labeled as poor performers, they can sue for the damage to their reputation.

This is especially true if they can prove that the accusations were made intentionally or with malice.

In these kinds of cases, we’re likely to see class action lawsuits, where groups of employees band together. Normally, firings are considered individualized. But when the government fires large groups with the same justification, it strengthens the case for collective legal action.

---

3. Violations of Civil Service Protections

The third category involves employees protected by civil service rules—rules designed to prevent political purges and ensure a professional, apolitical government workforce.

The whole point of civil service is to avoid a system where every new administration wipes out the previous one’s employees. It’s about preserving expertise and consistency in government.

These are the very people this administration often labels as the “deep state.” In reality, they are public servants—people dedicated to doing their jobs with integrity, regardless of who’s in power.

And yes, many firings have violated these civil service protections.

For example, career staff in the Department of Justice—including those who worked on the January 6th cases—were summarily dismissed. That clearly violates civil service rules.

Independent watchdogs like the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Office of Special Counsel (a quasi-independent agency) have already identified multiple violations.

Lawsuits are underway, and we’ll see more.

---

4. Employees Exempt from Civil Service Protections

Finally, there are employees not protected by civil service rules—typically those in the intelligence community. This includes sectors like the FBI and the CIA.

But lack of civil service protection doesn’t mean they’re completely vulnerable.

If they’re defamed, for instance, they still have legal recourse. Plus, if their own agency has established internal procedures for dismissals, those must be followed.

According to a great article from Just Security (a legal blog affiliated with NYU, and full disclosure, I’m on their board), even employees exempt from civil service rules can challenge dismissals if their agency violated internal procedures.

---

What’s Next? The Supreme Court

Ultimately, all these legal battles are heading to the Supreme Court—and fast.

The central question?

Does the president have the absolute authority to hire and fire anyone, at any level, without adhering to civil service rules?

For senior cabinet officials, that’s already well-established. But for career professionals and lower-level employees, it’s a different story.

The Supreme Court will have to decide:

• Does the executive branch have unchecked power?

• Can Congress still protect federal employees through legislation and oversight?

Personally, I find the implications alarming. If Congress funds agencies like the FBI, shouldn’t they be assured that those employees can’t just be fired at will?

Congress deserves to know its funding decisions will result in stable, long-term projects—not just political gamesmanship.

And don’t forget about oversight. Congress must be able to monitor these agencies, ensuring they serve the public interest—not just the whims of the executive branch.

---

Tracking These Cases

If you want to keep track of these lawsuits, I highly recommend Just Security’s Litigation Tracker.

It’s an excellent, user-friendly resource—no legal background required. You’ll find:

• Grouped lawsuits by topic (like birthright citizenship).

• Status updates on cases, including whether a temporary restraining order or injunction has been issued.

This is one of the best ways to stay informed about the legal onslaught we’re facing.

---

Final Thoughts

I know this was a deep dive, but I wanted to flag the critical legal issues we’re seeing.

These aren’t just theoretical concerns—these lawsuits are about protecting the foundations of our democracy.

So thank you, again, for the great questions. Keep them coming.