Federal Court Rules Trump Administration 'Unlawfully Usurped the Authority' of FEMA Over Staffing

The Trump administration unlawfully took control of Federal Emergency Management Agency staffing decisions through the Department of Homeland Security during workforce reductions in 2025, US District Judge Susan Illston has ruled. The federal court found violations of statutory protections governing FEMA, but the remedy remains unresolved.

For context, the dispute began in April 2025, when unions led by the American Federation of Government Employees sued President Donald Trump over what they called 'the unconstitutional dismantling of the federal government'. The litigation subsequently narrowed into more specific claims, with agency-related disputes considered separately.

Federal Court Finds FEMA's Staffing Authority Was Overridden

In her 32-page order, Illston found that DHS had 'unlawfully usurped the authority' of FEMA 'to make its own personnel decisions'. The decision followed expedited discovery and completed briefing on the FEMA claims.

At the centre of the dispute were renewals for Cadre of On-Call Response/Recovery Employees, known as CORE staff. These full-time employees are hired for terms of two to four years to work across disasters, rather than for one particular emergency.

Illston found that DHS unlawfully assumed authority over those renewals. FEMA, through a former official, also acted unlawfully by accepting DHS control over CORE renewals and staffing numbers, according to the order.

Who made the decisions mattered.

The court found violations of the Post-Katrina Act, which reformed FEMA's organisation after Hurricane Katrina, and the appropriations act that ended the government shutdown referenced in the order. Those actions also breached the Administrative Procedure Act, the federal law governing administrative agencies.

Changed Plans Complicate Relief Against the Trump Administration

The staffing picture changed during the litigation. A leaked proposal to cut FEMA's workforce by 50% was abandoned after it became public, and Illston accepted the government's argument that some requested remedies no longer fit the circumstances.

'The Court agrees with defendants that some of the relief plaintiffs seek is quite broad and no longer seems to fit with the facts as they have unfolded over the months of this litigation,' she wrote.

The order states that, since 22 January 2026, FEMA was no longer systematically declining to renew CORE staff. That change did not resolve the question of agency authority.

According to the court, DHS continued to control renewals, while employees received shorter appointments of six months to one year. Historical terms had been two years, followed more recently by four-year terms.

Renewals were happening again, then. The court nevertheless found that DHS continued to exercise authority that belonged to FEMA.

Deleted Messages Hamper the Federal Court's Review

Illston also found that the intentional deletion of relevant Signal messages had hampered the unions' ability to prove their claims and the court's ability to evaluate them.

According to the court's findings, senior FEMA and DHS officials discussed staffing through Signal on personal mobile phones. They selected automatic deletion settings that often erased messages within one to four weeks.

The court found that relevant messages were irrecoverable, that their loss prejudiced the unions and that defendants acted with the intention of depriving them of those messages in the litigation.

Those missing communications left gaps in the evidence surrounding staffing decisions, including the abandoned workforce reduction proposal.

Given the changing circumstances and missing information, Illston directed the parties to meet and confer over relief. If they cannot agree, they must submit a joint statement identifying what remains outstanding by 9 October 2026.

'The Court will then issue a ruling on relief forthwith.'