Supreme Court gives Donald Trump another big win

The U.S. Supreme Court said President Donald Trump’s administration can proceed with plans to lay off some 1,400 employees at the Department of Education—marking another win for the White House from the conservative-leaning high court.

A majority of the justices lifted a lower-court ruling that had indefinitely paused the administration’s plan. Liberal Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented.

“Today, the Supreme Court again confirmed the obvious: the President of the United States, as the head of the Executive Branch, has the ultimate authority to make decisions about staffing levels, administrative organization, and day-to-day operations of federal agencies,” Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a press release.

“While today’s ruling is a significant win for students and families, it is a shame that the highest court in the land had to step in to allow President Trump to advance the reforms Americans elected him to deliver using the authorities granted to him by the U.S. Constitution.”

Why It Matters
The Trump administration has had mixed results from the country’s highest court since January, with the conservative-majority bench issuing some decisions that have, at times, limited the president’s actions, including on immigration and changes to the federal government. The White House has repeatedly criticized lower-court judges for issuing sweeping injunctions, preventing policy implementation.

What To Know
The unsigned order Monday lifted a lower-court ruling that indefinitely paused Trump’s plan to shed staff at the Department of Education (DOE). U.S. District Judge Myong Joun in Boston had also called into question the wider plans. An appeals court denied a stay while the government challenged the order.

Trump and McMahon have made it clear that they want to eliminate the DOE, arguing that its functions should be left up to states. In their dissent, the liberal justices made it clear that only Congress had the power to shut down a government department.

In her dissent, Sotomayor wrote that the court was allowing the administration to do what it wanted, describing that decision as “indefensible.”

Reasoning was missing from the majority of justices. This is common in emergency appeals, but Sotomayor said her fellow justices were avoiding clarifying legally questionable actions.

Monday’s move comes after another decision by the Supreme Court last week that would allow Trump to significantly reduce the size of the federal workforce.

What People Are Saying
Linda McMahon, secretary of education, in a press release: “The U.S. Department of Education will now deliver on its mandate to restore excellence in American education. We will carry out the reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability and to ensure resources are directed where they matter most – to students, parents, and teachers.

“As we return education to the states, this Administration will continue to perform all statutory duties while empowering families and teachers by reducing education bureaucracy.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent: “When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it. Two lower courts rose to the occasion, preliminarily enjoining the mass firings while the litigation remains ongoing. Rather than maintain the status quo, however, this Court now intervenes, lifting the injunction and permitting the Government to proceed with dismantling the Department.

“That decision is indefensible. It hands the Executive the power to repeal statutes by firing all those necessary to carry them out. The majority is either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naive, but either way the threat to our Constitution’s separation of powers is grave. Unable to join in this misuse of our emergency docket, I respectfully dissent.”

What Happens Next
Attorneys for the DOE told the court that the department will continue to function, simply with fewer employees, rather than be abolished.