AFGE has scored a pair of victories in legal challenges over the Trump administration’s policy requiring federal job applicants to pledge their loyalty to the administration and attempts by the Department of Homeland Security to dismantle the Federal Emergency Management Agency by illegally slashing half of the agency’s workforce.
Loyalty question ruled illegal
On Sept. 11, Judge George O’Toole Jr. from the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts blocked the Trump administration from requiring federal job applicants to write essays praising President Trump’s executive orders or policy priorities.
AFGE sued the administration over the so-called loyalty question in November along with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and the National Association of Government Employees (NAGE).
Our lawsuit argued that the loyalty question violated the Administrative Procedure Act by infringing on applicants’ First Amendment free-speech rights – and the judge agreed.
“The plaintiffs are thus likely to succeed in showing that there is no legitimate governmental interest in inquiring into the political beliefs of applicants to federal civil service vacancies,” O’Toole said in his order.
Allowing this practice to continue would cause irreparable harm to workers applying to the merit-based civil service, the judge added.
“Requiring federal job applicants to answer politically motivated questions goes against the very nature of the nonpartisan civil service, and we are pleased the judge has put an immediate stop to the administration’s loyalty questions,” AFGE National President Everett Kelley said. “Federal employees should be hired based solely on their ability to perform the job – not their allegiance to any particular administration.”
The court’s order prevents the Office of Personnel Management from enforcing its directive that agencies include the loyalty question on civil service job applications while our lawsuit proceeds. More than 70,000 federal job postings have included the loyalty question over the past year.
AFGE and the other union plaintiffs are represented in this lawsuit by Democracy Forward, Protect Democracy, and Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP.
FEMA staffing cuts ruled unlawful
In another legal victory, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston ruled Sept. 11 that the administration’s attempts to slash the Federal Emergency Management Agency workforce in half were illegal.
AFGE and other parties sued over the FEMA cuts in January as part of a larger lawsuit filed in April 2025 by AFGE and a large coalition of groups challenging the Trump administration’s unlawful reorganization and downsizing of the federal government without congressional authority.
Our complaint asserted that the FEMA job cuts ordered by the Department of Homeland Security in December violated congressional protections designed to preserve FEMA’s independence and ability to carry out its statutory mission. We also argued that the cuts would leave FEMA unable to adequately prepare for or respond to natural disasters and other emergencies, placing lives and property at risk and undermining the very purpose for which Congress created the agency.
In her opinion, Judge Illston noted that FEMA’s own supervisors objected to Homeland Security’s plans to slash the agency’s workforce in half.
“Frankly, the FEMA staffing plan number appears as if pulled from thin air,” Illston wrote.
Even before the judge’s ruling, the administration reversed plans to slash half of FEMA’s workforce and even began rehiring many of the workers it had fired – although for shorter terms and without providing any backpay for the time they were out of work.
“In the immediate term, our lawsuit has prevented FEMA from making further staffing cuts and has resulted in most terminated employees getting their jobs back,” AFGE National President Everett Kelley said.
Click here for a summary of AFGE’s lawsuits against the Trump administration.