'A sham': Federal judge blasts Trump admin on improper firings of federal workers; orders rehiring

Summary

The Rachel Maddow Show Summary

Episode Title: 'A sham': Federal judge blasts Trump admin on improper firings of federal workers; orders rehiring
Release Date: March 14, 2025
Host: Rachel Maddow, MSNBC

---

Introduction

In this pivotal episode of The Rachel Maddow Show, host Rachel Maddow delves into a landmark federal court ruling that has significant implications for the Trump administration's handling of federal employment. The episode provides a comprehensive analysis of the judge's condemnation of the administration's improper firings and the subsequent orders to reinstate thousands of government workers.

---

Legal Case Details

Timestamp [00:30]: Host Chris Hayes opens the discussion by outlining the recent legal battle in a California federal courthouse. The case centers on the Trump administration's directive to federal agencies to terminate tens of thousands of employees—a move now being challenged as unlawful.

Key Points:

• The Trump White House, in conjunction with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), instructed federal agencies to fire a significant number of government workers.
• The plaintiffs, represented by a union of affected employees, argue that these mass firings lacked legal authority and due process.
• The Trump administration's defense has been notably absent, with no officials willing to testify or explain the rationale behind the terminations.

Notable Quote:

"Your Honor, what we have before the court is record evidence that conclusively establishes that OPM directed the terminations at issue." – Plaintiff's Lawyer [05:15]

---

Judge’s Ruling and Statements

Timestamp [15:45]: The federal judge delivers a scathing indictment of the Trump administration's actions. He labels the firings as a "sham" and emphasizes the legality violations inherent in the administration's directives.

Key Points:

• The judge criticizes the use of performance-based terminations, especially when employees had stellar performance reviews.
• He condemns the OPM's overreach, stating, "it is a sad day when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance, when they know good and well that's a lie."

Judge: "That should not have been done in our country. It was a sham in order to avoid statutory requirements." [20:30]

• Orders were issued mandating the immediate reinstatement of affected employees across multiple federal agencies, including the VA, USDA, Department of Defense, and more.
• The judge restricts OPM's authority, clearly stating, "OPM has no authority whatsoever to direct, order, or require in any way that any agency fire any employee."

Notable Quote:

"Whenever you submit declarations, those people should be submitted to cross-examination, just like the plaintiff side should be." – Judge [14:50]

---

Immediate Impact

Timestamp [25:28]: Following the ruling, thousands of federal employees were reinstated across various departments. The judge's immediate orders ensure that these workers regain their positions without further delay.

Key Points:

• The Office of Personnel Management can no longer dictate the termination of federal employees.
• Agencies are prohibited from using the previously mandated termination templates, ensuring future layoffs adhere to legal standards.
• The ruling serves as a direct blow to the Trump administration's efforts to overhaul federal employment practices.

Notable Quote:

"If you want to appeal to the Court of Appeals, God bless you, I want you to, because I'm tired of seeing you stonewall on, trying to get at the truth." – Judge [22:10]

---

Additional Legal Developments

Timestamp [35:20]: The episode updates viewers on a similar ruling from a federal court in Maryland, reinforcing the California decision's impact.

Key Points:

• The Maryland judge issued an order echoing the California ruling, mandating the reinstatement of thousands of federal employees.
• The scope of the rulings now spans multiple agencies nationwide, further limiting the Trump administration's control over federal workforce decisions.

Notable Quote:

"The law is clear that when dismissing an employee due to unsatisfactory performance, the employer must honestly be dissatisfied with the probationer's conduct or performance after giving him a fair trial on the job." – Maryland Judge [40:00]

---

Community Reactions

Timestamp [25:59]: The episode highlights grassroots support for reinstated federal workers, focusing on Hamilton, Montana.

Key Points:

• Hamilton City Council had to relocate its meeting to accommodate the large turnout of residents supporting reinstated federal workers.
• Community members emphasize the vital role these employees play in maintaining local services and the economy.

Notable Quote:

"Federal employees who live, work, raise families in Ravalli County are people who care about and contribute to our rural quality of life." – Townsperson [27:47]

---

Political Implications

Timestamp [34:09]: The conversation shifts to the broader political landscape, including a discussion with Congressman Mike Levin about the ongoing government funding crisis.

Key Points:

• Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer's decision to support a continuing resolution to prevent a government shutdown was met with disappointment by some Democrats, including Congressman Levin.
• Levin expresses concern that extending the current policies allows Trump and his allies to continue undermining federal agencies.
• The conversation touches on the potential long-term impacts of the administration's actions on federal workforce morale and effectiveness.

Notable Quote:

"There is no perfect answer here, but I think it's very clear to me that if Trump and Musk are given six more months to run roughshod over our agencies... we have to stand up and we have to fight against all of this." – Congressman Mike Levin [37:05]

---

Conclusion

The episode underscores a critical turning point in the Trump administration's approach to federal employment. The dual rulings from California and Maryland not only restore thousands of jobs but also clamp down on the administration's ability to unilaterally restructure the federal workforce without legal justification. Host Rachel Maddow and her panelists highlight the broader implications for government transparency, accountability, and the protection of public servants' rights.

---

Key Takeaways

• Legal Accountability: The courts have decisively ruled against the Trump administration's improper firings, emphasizing the necessity of lawful employment practices.
• Restoration of Jobs: Immediate reinstatement of thousands of federal employees across multiple agencies ensures that vital government functions continue uninterrupted.
• Limitations on OPM: The Office of Personnel Management is stripped of its authority to mandate federal employee terminations without due process.
• Political Ramifications: Ongoing debates within Congress about government funding reflect the contentious nature of the administration's policies and their impact on federal workers.

---

This episode serves as a crucial reminder of the judiciary's role in checking executive overreach and safeguarding the rights of federal employees. For those seeking to understand the intricate dynamics between the Trump administration, federal agencies, and the legal system, this in-depth analysis offers invaluable insights.

Transcript

[Rachel Maddow]

Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts New episodes of all your favorite MSNBC shows Now, ad free + ad free listening to all of Rachel Maddow's original series, Ultra Bagman and Deja News and all MSNBC original podcasts are available ad free and with bonus content including why Is this Happening? Felshey Band Book Club and more. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

[Chris Hayes]

Fireworks day today in the news. There's so much to get to. Most importantly, I think thousands of people fired by Donald Trump are getting their jobs back today because of the first round of proverbial fireworks that went off in a California federal courthouse. And I just, just, just got the transcript of what happened there. Trying all day to get it. Finally got it. I really want to share this with you. All right, so let me set the scene. Trump administration has sent a lawyer to defend them in this case in federal court in Northern California, but they are refusing to send any officials from the Trump administration to testify in this case to explain what they have done and to be questioned about it. The basis of this case is that the Trump White House, the Office of Personnel Management and the Trump White House told federal agencies last month essentially to fire tens of thousands of people who work for the government, potentially hundreds of thousands of people. And then after the Trump White House, the Office of Personnel Management told the agencies to fire all those people, then all those people got fired. And it really does not seem like that was legal. It has never seemed like that was legal that the White House would have the authority to make those kinds of mass firings. But again, they won't send anybody to testify about what exactly they did. So this from the transcript. So the, the lawyer who is suing the Trump administration says this, Your Honor, quote, what we have before the court is record evidence that conclusively establishes that OPM directed the terminations at issue. We have a very unusual circumstance where the government has not mounted, has, has not attempted to say that they factually dispute that they've actually withdrawn the declaration by which they were attempting to dispute that. And there's no record evidence on the other side by which they have disputed this fact. The judge, I tend to agree with you on that. And the government, I believe, has tried to frustrate the judge's ability to get at the truth of what happened here and then set forth sham declarations to a sham declaration. They withdrew it, then substituted another. That's not the way it works in the US District Court. The judge says, quote, I'm going to Talk to the government about that in a minute. I had expected to have an evidentiary hearing today in which these people would testify. And if they wanted to get your people on the stand, I was going to make that happen too. It would be fair. But instead, we have been frustrated in that the judge then says to the lawyer for the plaintiffs, quote, I'd like to hear your views on what relief should be issued today. T O D A Y today. The lawyer, thank you, your honor. We are aligned in wanting that to happen as well. He spelled out T O D a Y. And so then they have a conversation, the judge and the lawyer for the plaintiffs, the lawyer who's suing the Trump administration on behalf of the fired employees. And they talk about what the fired employees who are suing the Trump administration, what they're seeking from the judge today, the kind of relief they want. They say they want a list of everybody who's been fired that haven't been able to get that, or even an enumeration from the government of how many people have been fired. They also want people to be reinstated if they have been fired illegally. So they go through all those details. Then it's time for the Trump administration lawyer to make his side of the case. And he starts explaining to the judge that all these fired workers, the only reason they were fired is because nobody wanted them. Nobody told anybody to fire anything. There was no instructions to fire people. These are just unwanted workers. If anybody wanted them back, they surely would have been rehired by now, right? At which point the judge interjects. The judge, quote, well, maybe that's why we need an injunction that tells them to rehire them. You will not bring the people in here to be cross examined. You are afraid to do so because, you know, cross examination would reveal the truth. Trump administration lawyer tries to interject respectfully the judge continues, this is the US District Court. Whenever you submit declarations, those people should be submitted to cross examination, just like the plaintiff side should be. And we then we get at the truth of whether your story is actually true. I tend to doubt it. I tend to doubt that you are telling me the truth. Whenever we hear all the evidence, eventually, why can't you bring your people in to be cross examined or to be deposed at their convenience? I said two hours for Mr. Ezell. Mr. Ezell is the acting head of OPM. I said two hours for Mr. Ezell. A deposition at his convenience. And you withdrew his declaration rather than do that? Come on, that's a sham. The judge says, quote, go ahead. I'M I'm. It upsets me. I want you to know that I have been practicing or serving in this court for over 50 years. And I know how we get at the truth. And you're not helping me get at the truth. You're giving me press releases, sham documents. All right? He says, quote, I'm getting mad at you and I shouldn't. The judge then decided in this hearing today that he wasn't going to wait to give a written ruling. Decided. You know what? I've heard enough. He decided he was going to rule from the bench today. T O D A Y today. We started with this. The judge, quote, On February 13, 2025, a briefing paper from Human Resources Management at the Forest Service says this, quote, all that's spelled A L L. All federal agencies, including the Department of Agriculture, were notified on February 12 by the office of Personnel Management to terminate all employees who have not completed their probationary or period. That then led to the termination of a lot of people, the judge says, but one in particular I will give as an example. Leandra Bailey was a physical science information specialist in Albuquerque. In September of last year, she'd received a performance review in which she was, quote, fully successful in every category. Not just some, but every category. On February 13, she was terminated using the OPM template letter, because in addition to directing these terminations, OPM gave a proposed letter. And the letter said, I'm reading from it. Memorandum For Leandro Bailey, February 13, from the Director of Human Source Management at the U.S. forest Service. This is just one sentence, quote, the agency finds, based on your performance that you have not demonstrated that your further employment at the agency would be in the public interest. Close quote. And then the judge says this despite the fact that her most recent review was fully successful in every category. The judge says, now how could it be, you might ask, that the agency could find that based on her. Find that based on her performance when her performance had been stellar. The reason OPM wanted to put this based on performance was, at least in part, in my judgment, a gimmick, because the law always allows you to fire somebody for performance. Then the judge says this. Now, what I'm about to say is not the legal basis for what I'm going to order today. But I just want to say it. He says, quote, it is a sad day when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance, when they know good and well that's a lie. Excellent in all fully. What was the phrase? I don't want to misstate. It Quote, fully successful in every category, yet they terminate her based on her performance. That should not have been done in our country. It was a sham in order to avoid statutory requirements. It also happens to be that whenever you fire somebody based on performance, then they can't get unemployment insurance. So that makes it even worse. Worse, doesn't it? And then it makes it even worse because the next employer is going to say, well, have you ever been terminated based on performance? They're going to have to say yes to thousands of people. It is illustrative of the manipulation that was going on by OPM to try to orchestrate this government wide termination of probationary employees. Quote, the court finds that OPM did direct all the agencies to terminate probationary employees. The court rejects the government's attempt to use these press releases and to read between the lines to say that the agency heads made their own decision with no direction from opm. The relief that's going to be granted is as follows. First, the temporary restraining order will be extended. The VA shall immediately offer reinstatement to any and all probationary employees terminated on or about February 13th or 14th. This order finds that all such terminations were directed by defendant OPM and were unlawful because OPM had no authority to do so. Further, the VA shall cease any and all use of the template termination notice provided by OPM and shall immediately advise all probationary employees terminated February 13th and 14th that the notice and termination have been found to be unlawful by the U.S. district Court for the Northern District of California. The VA shall cease any termination of probationary employees at the direction of opm. To repeat, this order holds that OPM has no authority whatsoever to direct order or require in any way that any agency fire any employee. Now given the arguments and the facts in this case, namely that defendants have attempted to recast these directives as mere guidance, my order today, quote, further prohibits defendants from giving guidance as to whether any employee should be terminated. Any termination of agencies employees must be made by the agencies themselves, if made at all, and they must be made in conformity with the Civil Service Reform act and the Reduction in Force act and any other constitutional or statutory legal requirement. He says, quote, in seven calendar days relief defendant va, the VA shall submit a list of all probationary employees terminated on or about February 13th and 14th with an explanation as to each of what has been done to comply with this order. Then the judge says this. Now this order so far has only mentioned the va, the Veterans Administration, but the same relief is extended and I'm not going to repeat it. But I'm extending the same relief to the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the Department of the Interior, the Department of Treasury. And so it's the VA plus all those other agencies, he says, and this is without prejudice to extending the relief later in further to. To other agencies. The judge then closes with this, I will try to get out a short memorandum opinion that elaborates on this order, but this is the order, and it counts, effective immediately. Please don't say, oh, I'm waiting for the written order. This is the order from the bench. And then the judge then closes with this admonition to the Trump administration lawyer, quote, if you want to appeal to the Court of Appeals, God bless you, I want you to, because I'm tired of seeing you stonewall on, trying to get at the truth. And that is how thousands of people who work in our government, who Donald Trump and his top campaign donor tried to fire. That is how thousands of Americans got their jobs back today at the va, at usda, at the Defense Department, at the Department of Energy, at the Department of Interior, which includes the National Park Service, at the Treasury Department, which of course includes the irs. The court ruling also means that the Office of Personnel Management, which they've been using as, like, the central office for all this stuff that DOGE has been doing, right? The Office of Personal Management at the Personnel Management at the White House, can no longer tell anyone anything about anybody who should be fired for any reason from any part of the US Government. This is the order. You know, after getting reamed out like that and losing so resoundingly in court, I mean, they didn't, they didn't just have what they've done already reversed by a judge. It wasn't just that thousands of people got their jobs back today. It was not only that this judge told the agency, don't you even try to do anything like that ever again. Oh, and by the way, what you've been telling this court appears not to be true. And you'll be under oath before this court. If you want to keep telling porky pies to a federal judge, you'll do it in person and bear the consequences. I mean, after a government agency gets sliced and diced and julienned like that, like, like the OPM did today in court in this case, you would, under normal circumstances, expect the agency in question to put out a statement in response, like through their spokesperson that said, in this case, the spokesperson for this particular agency, the Trump administration spokesperson at OPM didn't put out a statement Today, you know, she is probably busy. Yesterday we learned from CNN that inside her office at opm, the OPM spokesperson has been very busy posting dozens of fashion influencer videos inside her government office in which she blows kisses and twirls and shows off all her different looks. And then she posts links where you can go buy the amazing fashion that she's wearing to her job in the office where she works as the spokesperson for opm, that is the spokesperson at the agency that has been firing thousands of park rangers and scientists and nuclear security experts because obviously those people don't deserve their jobs. Unlike her and the Trump folks, right, who definitely know what they're doing and who definitely deserve their jobs because they're doing such a good job at them. That story about the OPM spokesperson broke yesterday. Apparently she still has her job today because, well, why shouldn't she? Meanwhile, here's how the Trump administration is doing with its management of the federal government just in today's news. This is from the Washington Post. Quote Last week, amid the scramble inside federal agencies to meet Trump's return to office mandate, one CDC employee received links to a new government wide initiative promising to connect those who need workspace with those who have extra seats. When the CDC employee entered her home address to find nearby offices, she was surprised to receive suggestions for a closed Subway sandwich shop and a self storage facility. Another member of her CDC team was directed to a post office. So they work at the cdc. They were told to report for work. The Trump administration told them to report for work at a post office or a closed Subway sandwich shop or a mini storage. CDC employees? Sure, try it. See how it goes. Quote Another worker from a federal scientific agency was asked by an administrator to fill out a similar space request form, part of a Trump administration rollout of such services, including one they're calling Space Match, aimed at connecting federal employees with offices where they could work. When the Federal Scientific Agency worker entered her information, the two closest offices to which she was recommended did not seem to be federal offices at all. One appeared to be a building in an industrial zone that appeared to host support groups for people dealing with alcohol or debt problems. The other appeared to be a private home in a four unit building. So this is a person who has a job at a federal scientific agency. Donald Trump has a new high tech tool, a fancy new website that is assigned to this person. A new place to work. And the new place to work, this person has a choice, can either be a rehab or the house of someone who this person doesn't Know, space match. I bet it has an X in it somewhere. Space match. These guys are so tech savvy, right? They're so efficient. You know, taxes are due in a month. Taxes are due April 15. This week, Donald Trump, in his infinite wisdom, told people who work at the IRS that they should show up to work at buildings for which there are no desks for them. Quote, they have people. They have people in conference rooms, cafeterias, and even some closets. A Q and A handout was given to IRS employees. It included this question, how should I store my laptop and accessories at the end of the day if I don't have a permanent desk? The answer, quote, employees should secure their laptops and equipment in secure locations, such as via cable lock to a designated storage area, locker or permanent furniture fixture. This is what they're telling IRS to do. Buy a cable lock, like for your bike, and then like lock your laptop to a credenza or maybe you can find a really heavy potted plant. See if you can find a pillar and then you can lock your laptop to that. All your stuff, you just lock your stuff to that. Hopefully everything's got, like, hooks. That's how Donald Trump is running the irs, the agency that collects all the funds that run the federal government. That's how he's running the agency that is supposed to process hundreds of millions of tax returns that are due in one month. Do you think you're going to get your refund this year? We are keeping a close eye tonight on what is going on at the irs, even with all the probationary employees ordered reinstated today. The Washington Post broke the news today that Trump intends now to fire another 18,000 people from the IRS. He wants them gone by May 15. There also appears to be a lot of concern about one particular firing that just happened there. They just fired the top lawyer at the irs. That is reportedly ringing some major alarm bells by people who know how that agency works. So we will be keeping eyes on the irs. Markets tanked again today on purpose because of Donald Trump. The S&P 500 is now down more than 10% in less than a month. 10% in less than a month. Both the S&P 500 and the NASDAQ are now in what they call correction territory. And that sounds good, but it's not. The Dow dropped another 500, another 500 points today. Today, the Trump administration, oops, had to pull another high profile nominee. This time it was the vaccine conspiracy theorist Dave Weldon, whom Trump had nominated to run the cdc. They pulled his confirmation this Morning, just before his confirmation hearing, which was scheduled for this morning. They pulled it at the last minute because Dave Weldon apparently does not have the votes to get through the United States Senate and get confirmed, or at least I think so. That's what he tried to explain himself in a bizarre misconduct, misspelled and typo ridden letter he released after they pulled his name, in which he repeatedly praised Bobby Kennedy Jr. But misspelled Bobby because that's a hard one. The Trump administration today, oops, also apparently well and truly decided that it might have been a mistake to try to send random immigrants to Guantanamo as if they were Al Qaeda. As of today, they have now officially emptied the makeshift prison they were trying to set up at Guantanamo, which Trump said was going to hold 30,000 immigrants. It now holds zero. Today, this was the lobby of Trump Tower in Manhattan as Jewish protesters said, quote, not in our name, and engaged in mass peaceful civil disobedience in protest of Trump ordering the deportation of a Columbia University student named Mahmoud Khalil. They ordered his deportation. They are trying to revoke his green card specifically because he was involved in protests against the war in Gaza. You can see their signs today in the lobby of Trump Tower. Come for one. Face us all. Fight Nazis, not students. Jews say do not comply. Dozens of people were arrested in that act of civil disobedience today by Jewish activist groups. Today, NBC News reports that Donald Trump has given the order to the U.S. defense Department to prepare an invasion plan for Panama to prepare an invasion plan for the United States to send US Troops to Panama to invade that country, to seize the Panama Canal by force. He has given the order to the Defense Department to prepare that plan. And you know what? I'm sure the American people are going to love that. Everybody's going to sign right up to follow, you know, Corporal Vance into an invasion of Panama. Trump today continued to insist that Canada must become the 51st state in the United States. He says that is the only way out of the tariff insanity he is currently using to butcher the economies of both our countries. That's the way out. He says Canada has to become the 51st state or he's going to keep doing what he's doing. In the Oval Office today, Trump insisted in front of the head of NATO that the United States is going to annex Greenland. He said today he thought, quote, that would happen. The prime Minister of Greenland responded by saying that he is convening the leaders of all Greenland's political parties to, quote, tighten our rejection of Trump. In Denmark, the reaction was Clear as a bell. The head of the Defense Committee in the Danish parliament said tonight in response. Response, quote, it would mean war. He said, quote, it would mean war between two NATO countries, which, of course, would be the end of NATO, among other things. But the end of NATO, for the record, is the thing that Vladimir Putin wants more than anything. It's the thing that Donald Trump could give him that would really mean the most to him. It's Putin's reason for living. Vladimir Putin today, quite predictably rejected the supposed ceasefire deal that the United States presented to Russia on the Ukraine war. Wow. Who could have seen that coming? Trump will respond, obviously, by giving Putin more things he might want to, which Putin will keep saying. No. That's just today's news. Some of today's news on Donald Trump. Does this sound like a populist popular leader doing things that the people like and that the people want? I mean, just. Just on the, like, the Russia thing. New Quinnipiac polling out today. Which country comes closer to sharing the values of the United States, Ukraine or Russia? The American people say Ukraine, 65%. Russia, 9%. Same poll. Is Donald Trump not tough enough on Russia? Correct. Donald Trump is not tough enough on Russia, says more than 60% of the American people. Here's a straight up clear view. Do you have a favorable or unfavorable view of Vladimir Putin? The proportion of Americans who have a favorable view of Vladimir Putin is 7%. The proportion of Americans who have an unfavorable view of Vladimir Putin is 81%. And where would you put Donald Trump in that mix? The US Economy and the US Government and all of America's international relationships are being set on fire by a leader who is being opposed in the courts for his illegal actions and who is being opposed in the streets by a public that is increasingly horrified by what he is doing. There is not going to be an easy way out of this, but there is going to have to be some kind of way out of this. This is a collision course from 10 different directions. Congressman Mike Levin joins us straight ahead. Stay with us.

[Advertiser]

Auto insurance can all seem the same until it comes time to use it. So don't get stuck paying more for less coverage. Switch to USA auto insurance and you could start saving money in no time. Get a quote. Today, restrictions apply.

[Chris Hayes]

USA.

[Rachel Maddow]

It's President Trump's first 100 days and MSNBC's Alex Wagner will be covering it all from the front lines. What issue matters to you the most? Join her as she travels the country to talk to the people at the center of the President's policies and promises.

[Local Council Member]

Do you think now that he's pardoned.

[Congressman Mike Levin]

Everybody he can count on this group of people again?

[Advertiser]

Certainly.

[Rachel Maddow]

Watch for Trumpland with Alex Wagner wherever you're listening and follow subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen ad free.

[Luke Peppra]

In the early 14th century, a mighty emperor is given a holy task to seek forgiveness for his terrible crime. He has to make a journey like no other. Join me Luke Peppra as I tell you the story of Mansa Musa, the richest man who ever lived and his adventure that would change the world. Hear his incredible untold story over six action packed episodes on this Is History presents Empire of Gold. Available wherever you get your podcasts.

[Chris Hayes]

Hamilton, Montana about 5,000 people live there altogether. It's home to the Rocky Mountain Laboratories which is part of the National Institutes of Health. It's home to a lot of U.S. forest Service workers. It's absolutely beautiful part of the country. Last night Hamilton City Council held a meeting and they actually had to move it from where they usually meet to the local middle school because so many people showed up to talk to the local city council.

[Local News Reporter]

To show support for the federal workers in the area, many of whom have recently been fired by the Department of government efficiency or DOGE. Over 100 Ravalli county residents showed up to Hamilton City Council committee meeting, which had to be moved to the middle school to fit the amount of people who attended. The message from those who showed up was clear a discontentment with the actions being taken by the Trump administration.

[Chris Hayes]

The existential crisis that Hamilton faces. If you think that's hyperbole, just look.

[Townsperson]

At Pasadena or these other fires. Forest is right there. Federal employees who live, work, raise families in Ravalli county are people who care about and contribute to our rural quality of life. They serve all of us citizens here and they boost all of our economy here.

[Local Council Member]

If the NIH disposes of the Rocky Mountain Lab and all the employees of the Forest Service, I see all of everybody here just disappearing and going somewhere else.

[Townsperson]

This is a historic time in our country and we need to continue to support each other.

[Local Council Member]

We are not only going to pay for this economically in this valley, we're.

[Chris Hayes]

Going to pay for this with the.

[Local Council Member]

Knowledge and expertise and the ability to get anything done. And that is painful, trust me.

[Local News Reporter]

As for Hamilton City Council, they expressed their willingness to take action in whatever way they could help to support the federal workers in the Hamilton and surrounding area.

[Local Council Member]

This council has been diligently trying to find answers and solutions and this was one of our answers and solutions is to bring you all together here tonight to learn from you, to hear your experiences and continue to gather facts and information.

[Chris Hayes]

This council has been diligently trying to find answers, including bringing townspeople together, moving the meeting to the middle school so everybody could fit. And that report was from local kpax. That was Hamilton, Montana last night. Tonight in New Jersey, Democrat, former Democratic congressman and Tom Malinowski has been holding a town hall in person in his old district, which is now represented by a Republican. Constituents in that district have spent weeks asking Republican Congressman Tom Kaine to meet with them. Tom Kaine has been refusing to do so. And so the guy who used to represent that district, the Democrat, Tom Malinowski, had stepped in tonight to do it himself. Now, we thought we might have an empty chair here for that guy, but we didn't have enough chairs. And you guys are so much more important. It's ongoing in New Jersey tonight, Tomorrow afternoon, Minnesota's Democratic governor Tim Walz, the Democratic vice presidential nominee this past year, he's going to Iowa. He's going to hold a town hall in Des Moines in a red but very competitive congressional district. Same thing on Saturday. Governor Wallace is going to Nebraska. He's going to be holding a town hal. Town hall in Omaha. Again, a red but very competitive congressional district. Republicans are not holding town halls in places like this. And so Democrats are coming in and doing it for them. Governor Walz will do more of these town halls in Republican districts in Wisconsin, in Ohio. In his home state of Minnesota, California Congressman Ro Khanna, a Democrat, is planning town halls in three different Republican districts next weekend. It would not be fair to say that no Republicans in Congress are willing to go against their party's advice and hold old tone hells in person. They are occasionally still happening. For example, North Carolina tonight, Republican Congressman Chuck Edwards has been answering questions and facing the music from his constituents in Asheville.

[Townsperson]

And then, and then there would be another, and then there would be another process to, to evaluate where we're at there. Yeah.

[Chris Hayes]

One more just, I feel like.

[Townsperson]

This is not productive with everybody yelling at me. I mean, if you want to hear. Yeah, the question, the quest, the question. The questions are coming out of the box one at a time. I'm answering those for you. You're not going to like a lot of them. And you, and you certainly will have the right in the next election to cast your vote based off of what you hear coming to me now.

[Chris Hayes]

At least they like that answer. Republican Congressman Chuck Edwards getting an earful from his constituents in North Carolina tonight. And good on him for doing that. For the most part, when Republicans are willing to do town halls at all, they're only willing to do teletown halls. You know, virtual ones. Last night we thought we had found a forthcoming one in California, a Republican who was willing to hold an in person town hall. Turns out that was actually me totally screwing up and calling Democratic California Congressman Mike levin a Republican. 100% my error and I apologize for that. He is holding a town hall. He is a Democrat. He also holds lots of town halls. His next one is this weekend for his constituents in San Juan Capistrano. Congressman Levin joins us next. Stay with us.

[Advertiser]

Auto insurance can all seem the same until it comes time to use it. So don't get stuck paying more for less coverage. Switch to USA Auto Insurance and you could start saving money in no time. Get a quote today. Restrictions apply.

[Rachel Maddow]

Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts New episodes of all your favorite MSNBC shows now ad free plus ad free listening to all of Rachel Maddow's original series, Ultra Bagman and Deja News and all MSNBC original podcasts are available ad free and with both content including why is this Happening? Velshi Band Book Club and more. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. Stay up to date on the biggest issues of the day with the MSNBC Daily Newsletter. Each morning you'll get analysis by experts you trust, video highlights from your favorite shows.

[Chris Hayes]

I do think it's worth being very clear eyed, very realistic about what's going on here.

[Rachel Maddow]

Previews of our podcast and documentaries, plus written perspectives from the newsmakers themselves, all sent directly to your inbox each morning. Get the best of MSNBC all in one place. Sign up for msnbc [e-mail].

[Chris Hayes]

We are expecting a vote tomorrow afternoon on a continuing resolution essentially to keep the government funded and avoid a shutdown that would otherwise happen tomorrow night at midnight this evening, Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer set off a proverbial Roman candle inside a phone booth when he announced that he will vote for the continuing resolution to keep the government funded. This after a furious day of lobbying Democratic senators for them to vote no to let the Republicans shut down the government if they weren't going to work with Democrats to do anything substantively to change course. On the Appropriations Committee in the House sits Congressman Mike Levin, a Democrat of California. Congressman Levin, I am very sorry to say last night I referred to as a Republican on this show that was totally on me. But Congressman Levin, I Wanna tell you that you have a lot of constituents who watch this show and who are very, very, very prompt in letting people know how wrong they are when they do wrong stuff on television. I am very sorry about that. It was nice to meet thousands of your constituents last night online, and it is really nice to have you here.

[Congressman Mike Levin]

Thank you. I have the best constituents in America, Rachel.

[Chris Hayes]

Well, as I said, they're very online and they're very prompt, and I am, and I owe it to them. Let me ask you about the news today in the House. You're on the Appropriations Committee. In the House. House Democrats voted no on this continuing resolution. There was a big lobbying effort to get Senate Democrats to vote no on this as well. The Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, tonight said he's going to vote yes to keep the government funded, essentially with no concessions from the Republicans at all. What's your reaction to that?

[Congressman Mike Levin]

Well, I can only speak for myself, but I can tell you I'm incredibly disappointed. I think this is the wrong move, and I'm really proud of House Democrats. We stood together. This was a tough circumstance. There is no perfect answer here, but I think it's very clear to me that if Trump and Musk are given six more months to run roughshod over our agencies, to have cuts that, you know, maybe are not able to be defended against with the Empowerment Control act, lawsuits maybe being undercut, you know, with this cr, maybe validating some of that. I thought that, look, this wasn't that close of a call. And as far as the government shutdown, big chunks of the government are being shut down right now before our eyes. We see it at the va, we see it at the Social Security Administration. We see it across the board, the Department of Education, you know, and at the end of the day, we have to stand up and we have to fight against all of this. And I'm proud that virtually all of my. My House Democratic colleagues did that. And I know that at least my two senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, are fighting back. And look, there's still time before the vote tomorrow. I hope that Chuck Schumer hears loud and clear that so many of us think this is the wrong decision.

[Chris Hayes]

Hmm. What are you hearing from your constituents? I know you sent out a survey to your constituents over the last few days asking if they've been directly affected by the massive cuts to the federal workforce and the way that the federal government is essentially being hacked down like a sapling in Washington. What are you hearing back so far in terms of the effects in your district, but also what your constituents want you to do.

[Congressman Mike Levin]

It's really sad. You know, I have a huge veteran population in my district, so we know that roughly a third of the federal workers are veterans, and a lot of the people who are getting let go are veterans. And I think it's all about the personal stories, you know, whether it's the veteran that loses their job or no longer can get the health care the way that they're used to or, or whether it's the senior who doesn't have access to Social Security the way that they used to, or the children that don't have the nutrition assistance that they need to have enough to eat. The real world toll that this is taking on people, I think is the most important thing. It's not even about Democrats and Republicans as much as it is the people that we represent. And it's just a tragic, tragic situation. And my hope is that we can continue to tell those stories. Rachel, ultimately, the people that are impacted by this.

[Chris Hayes]

I want to ask about something you referenced in terms of the court orders that we are seeing. We're now starting to see really, really consequential orders, particularly from federal courts, ordering the reinstatement of fired workers. We had a really big ruling today in a federal court in California, in Northern California. We've just in the last few minutes have word of another really, really important ruling along those same lines from a federal court in Maryland. We're going to have detail on that in just a moment. We're just making sure that we're crossing all our T's and dotting all our I's on that. But we're also seeing from the president's top campaign donor, Elon Musk, from a lot of people around the president. We're seeing efforts to undercut the judiciary, efforts to say that individual judges are illegitimate or shouldn't be allowed to rule on certain cases, that judges ought to be fired, they ought to be impeached if they have ruled against Trump, even on procedural matters. I wonder what you think about the balance of what courts are doing to constrain what's happening at the administration level, but also the attacks on the courts that we're seeing in response to that expression of authority.

[Congressman Mike Levin]

I'm very concerned and, you know, I'm pleased that the Biden administration was able to get 200 judges in there in their four years. But this is one of the reasons that I am so adamantly opposed to the Republican CR because it could be seen as validating a lot of what Trump and Musk have been doing it could be seen retroactively as validating a lot of these actions, which I think are clearly in violation of the Empowerment Control act along with other federal laws like the Anti Deficiency Act. And we have to do everything we can to fight back. And the reality, Rachel, is we have an alternative. There is a real alternative, and that is a one month clean continuing resolution so that appropriators like me can actually come to the table. There was no effort by Republicans whatsoever to try to get a single Democratic idea incorporated into that bill. There were no meetings to talk about things, for example, like the California wildfire aid that's needed or for all the community project funding that we need for our district. It was Republicans controlling the White House, House and Senate jamming this through on a party line vote. And I hope that the Senate will have courage tomorrow because the alternative is six more months of this mess.

[Chris Hayes]

Yeah, I think that Senator Schumer has set something off tonight in Democratic politics. The reaction to him saying that he's going to vote for that CR I'm not sure he knew to expect. As you point out, that vote's gonna be tomorrow afternoon. There's a lot of time between now and then. We'll see if those Senate Democrats can be shifted. Congressman Mike Levin, Democrat of California. I really appreciate you being here, sir. Thank you, Rachel. Next time I'm in California, I owe you. I'm forgiven. I owe you a drink at least.

[Congressman Mike Levin]

I'll take it. Come moderate our town hall one of these days. We'd love to have you.

[Chris Hayes]

I will. I will, too. All right, thank you so much.

[Congressman Mike Levin]

All right, we're gonna take you up on that. All right, thank you, Rachel.

[Chris Hayes]

As I mentioned, we got a key update on that latest court ruling that's just happened in the last few minutes. That's next. Stay with us. All right, update. As we reported at the top of the show, federal judge in California today issued a blistering ruling from the bench in which he ordered the Trump administration to rehire thousands of people they had fired from the federal government at usda, Defense Department, Energy Department, Department of the Interior, the Treasury and the va. Well, I got two updates for you because tonight, just as we are coming on the air, the plaintiffs in that case, the California federal case, the plaintiffs are the union representing government workers. Plaintiffs went back to that same judge in California and essentially said thank you for this ruling today. Your Honor, can you please make it so it applies to even more agencies? They have now formally asked the judge to expand that order today to also order the reinstatement of fired employees at the Commerce Department, Education Department, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, the Justice Department, Department of Transportation, the epa, NASA, the National Science foundation, and the Small Business Administration. Update one. Here's Update two. Just minutes after those plaintiffs asked the California federal judge to expand his ruling and order even more agencies to rehire even more people, a second federal judge across the country in Maryland issued a ruling in an entirely separate case ordering the federal government also to rehire thousands of fired federal employees. This federal judge in Maryland tonight has just ordered that thousands of fired probationary employees must now be reinstated at ready for the list? Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Department of the Interior, Department of Labor, Department of Transportation, The Treasury Department, VA, USAID, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the EPA, the FDIC, the General Services Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, the Small Business Administration, and the National Archives and Records Administration, all of them. Reinstate all of your fired probationary employees. And if it seems like there's overlap between the list in those two cases, you are correct. As of tonight, just in today's news, we've got overlapping federal rulings ordering the immediate reinstatement of thousands of employees at multiple federal agencies. I'll tell you, the Maryland judge writes in this new order that's just out tonight, quote, the law is clear that when dismissing an employee due to unsatisfactory performance, the employer must honestly be dissatisfied with the probationer's conduct or performance after giving him a fair trial on the job. Again, two federal judges tonight with equally sweeping rulings, both in the same direction, both telling Trump, when you fired those people, you had no right give them back their jobs. Watch this space. All right, that's gonna do it for me tonight. I feel like I sat down here about three seconds ago and the hour is. But I'll see you again 9:00 tomorrow and every night this week, 9:00pm Eastern.

[Rachel Maddow]

Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. New episodes of all your favorite MSNBC shows Now, ad free + ad free listening to all of Rachel Maddow's original series Ultra Bagman and Deja News. And all MSNBC original podcasts are available ad free and with bonus content including why Is this Happening? Felshi Band Book Club and more. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.