Washington – The Supreme Court allowed Monday that the Trump administration advanced with plans to carry out mass dismissals in the Department of Education that were blocked by a federal judge.
The conservative majority court, without any explanation, granted an emergency application for the administration that blocks the federal judge’s ruling.
The three liberal members of the court opposed, with Judge Sonia Sotomayor writing an abrasing dissident opinion.
“When the Executive publicly announces his intention to violate the law, and then executes that promise, it is the duty of the Judiciary to verify that illegality, does not sell it,” he wrote.
Follow the live policy coverage here
The majority of the court is “deliberately blind to the implications of its ruling or naive, but in any way the threat to the separation of powers of our Constitution is serious,” added Sotomayor.
She said the decision also “rewards a clear challenge” of the Constitution.
The case is a separate dispute that the Supreme Court decided last week when it allowed the Trump administration to move forward with plans to carry out layoffs in a wide range of government agencies.
In the case of the Department of Education, the American District Judge of Massachusetts, Myong Joun, wrote in his May 22 ruling that the evidence “reveals that the true intention of the defendants is effectively dismantling the department without an authorized statute.”
The administration in its first months has tried to aggressively reduce the size of some government agencies to the point of making them ineffective, which caused statements that the role of Congress has usurped, which establishes them and finances them.
When assuming the position earlier this year, President Donald Trump issued an executive order saying that his administration “would take all necessary measures to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education.”
The Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon, ordered mass dismissals, saying in a memorandum circulated to employees that their final objective was to “close the department”, a measure that has not been approved by Congress.
General lawyer D. John Sauer said in judicial documents that the Joun’s ruling should be suspended because the president’s authority invades to operate federal agencies.
He also argued that the plaintiffs who challenge the measure, including states, school districts and employee unions, had no legal position to present their claims.
Sauer said that the “force reduction” involves 1,378 employees, adding that the government has been “clear as clear” that it is not part of an effort to eliminate the department as some Republicans want.
Only Congress can do that, Sauer acknowledged.
In judicial documents, New York Attorney General, Letitia James, said the challengers had shown that Trump’s measure was “arbitrary and capricious, contrary to the law and unconstitutional.”
Among other things, the reduction in the force “incorrectly eliminated or decimated equipment that perform successfully mandatory tasks without considering, much less alternative mechanisms for which such duties can be fulfilled,” he added.
In addition, the policy “violates the affirmative legal restrictions to the author’s authority to reallocate, consolidate, alter or abolish legal functions within the department,” said James.
