The restriction of language and removal of information makes it harder to address climate issues, say the authors of a new report on environmental information under Trump 2.0.
A three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court rejected claims that President Trump’s barring collective bargaining for two-thirds of the federal workforce was retaliatory in nature, finding that the administration would have done so regardless of labor groups’ various legal challenges.
Both of the White House’s efforts to secure declaratory judgments in advance of formally stripping more than 1 million federal workers of their collective bargaining rights have now failed.
While House Democrats and unions are working over the August recess to secure signatures on a discharge petition to force the chamber to consider a bill overturning the president’s edict stripping two-thirds of federal employees of their collective bargaining rights, the House NDAA includes language blocking its implementation at the Pentagon.
Paul Ingrassia, 28, has cavorted with neo-Nazis and publicly described the federal workers he would be tasked with protecting as “parasites” and “bugmen.”
The judge who dissented from an appellate court’s initial decision allowing the edict to be implemented issued a warning about the high standards that should accompany a judicial stay.
COMMENTARY | "If a president objects to a federal law, they need to take it up with Congress, not fire everyone hired to implement it," writes Doreen Greenwald, national president of the National Treasury Employees Union.
Critics are raising alarms over the Restoring Gold Standard Science executive order, saying the updated guidelines could weaken safeguards meant to keep politics out of federal research.
The Trump administration is cheering a SCOTUS ruling and its impact on the federal workforce, but attorneys on a key reduction-in-force case say its impact on feds is currently limited.
Paul Ingrassia, 28, has been nominated to lead the office that investigates politically motivated firings and Hatch Act violations, despite statements supporting a purge of workers and cavorting with neo-Nazis.
A federal judge in California tailored his decision around the administration’s violations against labor groups’ First Amendment rights, avoiding thornier questions about presidential power.