This week: Trump administration intensifies assaults on federal agencies
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), housed in the White House, has been facing legal challenges due to its relentless pursuit of unrestricted access to sensitive federal government infrastructure and data without proper authorization. Recently, EPI, the AFL-CIO, and a group of member unions have extended their lawsuit to include the Department of Health and Human Services and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as agencies in need of protection from DOGE’s overreach.
Despite the Trump administration’s goal of reducing the federal workforce by at least 10%, the number of employees who accepted deferred resignation offers fell short of expectations. Consequently, the administration is resorting to more drastic measures to meet its target, including instructing some agencies to terminate employees in their probationary period. These employees, having worked for the federal government for less than a year, lack the full job protections afforded to most federal workers. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) has vowed to challenge these mass firings through legal means.
In addition to the involuntary removal of federal employees, the Trump administration has been unlawfully ousting the leadership of independent agencies, which are designed to be insulated from political influence. Among those fired include the Chair of the Federal Labor Relations Authority and a member of the Merit Systems Protection Board. These agencies play a crucial role in safeguarding the legal rights of federal workers and maintaining harmonious labor relations within the government. Furthermore, operations at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau—an independent agency dedicated to safeguarding consumers from financial fraud—have been effectively halted by the administration.
While the Trump administration heavily relies on Elon Musk’s DOGE team to carry out its mandates, Musk himself is under investigation for potential misconduct at his companies by some of the very agencies he now oversees. For instance, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) probed a Tesla facility following a worker’s death, and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that SpaceX unlawfully terminated employees for engaging in collective workplace actions. Musk’s businesses have also come under scrutiny by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for potential violations related to investor information. Given the lack of transparency regarding Musk’s financial interests and the access granted to privileged government information, there is concern that personal gain may be a driving force behind DOGE’s operations.
On the trade front, the administration’s much-anticipated announcement of a reciprocal tariffs policy turned out to be mere rhetoric devoid of concrete action. The presidential memorandum issued by the White House only mandates further studies and policy recommendations to be included in a report slated for April, failing to implement any new tariffs. The administration’s trade policies have been characterized by initial announcements followed by subsequent retreats or delays in implementation. For example, after facing backlash from allied nations, the business community, and consumers, proposed tariffs on Canada and Mexico were put on hold, and the decision to suspend tax exemptions on Chinese imports was reversed. This pattern suggests that the administration may prioritize generating chaos over actual substantive policy changes in the realm of trade. The White House’s inconsistent approach to trade matters raises questions about the efficacy and stability of its economic policies.
