you're watching the legal breakdown Glenn we have the most consequential ruling against Donald Trump yet in the courts what just happened yeah Brian a huge ruling a federal judge out in California judge William alsup just ruled that the mass firings of uh probationary employees we're talking tens of thousands of employees was illegal and he ordered the Trump Administration to rehire or offer to restore them to their federal jobs you know in a very real sense or in substance judge alsup told Donald Trump that he must go from you're fired to you're rehired and this is something that is not going to sit well with uh Donald Trump with the administration of course it will be subject to an appeal and we can talk about that in a few minutes but Brian you know he ruled From the Bench judge alsup ruled from the bench and so we have to rely on the reporting that came out regarding what he said until we have a transcript but I have to tell you the federal courts are taking off the gloves and they are punching in a way you don't often see figuratively speaking punching in a way you don't often see federal court judges punch let me read just a couple of Judge alsup's comments the quotes that he made today from the bench he said 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 I mean those are really direct pointed comments from this judge he went on to say this was a sham in order to try to avoid statutory requirements that was a a little more politely he went he went about saying yeah you did it intentionally you tried to hide it you tried to misrepresent it but you violated the law and then it actually gets wor for Donald Trump's doj lawyers who are going into court and arguing this garbage to federal court judges here's what judge alsup had to say about the doj attorneys Donald Trump's doj attorneys who were arguing this case in court he said he quote felt misled by the US government in other words by the doj attorneys who were arguing the case he said it upsets me I want you to know that you're not helping me get it the truth you're giving me press releases and Sham documents and the reason I quote some of that language Brian is because that's the kind of stuff that gets lawyers referred to Bar counsel for ethics investigations and possible sanctions and why these lawyers are willing to demean debase blown themselves in federal court for the likes of Donald Trump is beyond me but it looks like they're doing it and importantly federal judges are holding them accountable for it one after another well look Glenn I know that we've all become accustomed to aggressive language just watching politics but can you convey to us how unorthodox it is for a judge to speak like this to a lawyer based on something that the lawyer presented in court Brian I'm so glad you asked me that question because I think people might misunderstand or might misperceive that the norm today is this kind of language in court coming from federal judges you know for 30 years I never left the courtroom so I practiced before military judges civilian judges trial court judges appell Court judges federal judges and local judges pretty much every kind of Judge imaginable I never heard language like this I never experienced language like this but in the last 24 hours do you realize we had three federal court judges say the first one compared Donald Trump to the queen of hearts in Allison Wonderland saying about subjects that dis displeased her off with their heads that was one judge a a second judge yesterday said that the Trump Administration was violating laws that are on the books to quote save the people from autocracy and then today you had the comments from Judge alsup that we just reviewed this is not normal this is like scorched Earth hair on fire coming from these federal judges but what it is you know we're talking about the points of light amidst the Trump induced Darkness these judges are stepping up as beacons of light and beacons of Truth and beacons of accountability and it looks like they really are trying to light the way to a return to a healthy democracy not to sound melodramatic but that is just how dramatically unusual you know it is to hear things like this from federal court judges can you walk us through the ruling itself because as far as I was concerned I mean I know that there are obviously a lot of issues with with this concept of wrongful termination but it seemed that the probationary employees were relatively easy targets because they were still not tenured um tenured employees in their in their positions and so they were kind of ripe for dismissal and so why was the ruling here handed down against the Trump Administration yeah it's a great question cuz none of this is really intuitive it involves employment law it in it involves Civil Service protections that apply differently to probationary employees and I don't want to use the word tenured employees but employees who have already made it through the probationary period so they're permanent federal government employees but there are really two main concerns or main issues that you know renders these firings illegal unlawful in violation of federal government rules policies and procedures as you say it would be easy to terminate probationary employees if you followed the law and you touched the bases and gave the probationary employees kind of the rights that they enjoy but here's the thing the Trump Administration didn't do that first of all the office of personnel management OPM has no authority to direct the firings of federal government employees but OPM is indeed the one who put out the missive that all of these people will be fired now each of the agencies each agency head could have gone through the process of deciding which probationary employees to terminate if they kind of touched all the procedural basis but that's not the way they did it OPM didn't have the authority to do it and this adds insult to injury and actually this next thing that we're going to discuss adds um insult to defamation because what they did as judge alsup found is they lied about it so OPM first didn't have the authority and then when they wrongfully terminated all these people they said it's because you're poor performers which was Stone Cold it wasn't performance related it's because Donald Trump is trying to hollow out improperly and unlawfully it turns out hollow out the federal Workforce so there are those two different reasons that led judge alsup to conclude no no no these are unlawful terminations and I am ordering you to rehire or offer these probationary employees their jobs back now you know we have a lot to talk about regarding moving forward what issues does this conjure up and there are lots of issues that you know will still have to be overcome before these you know attorneys get to go back to their old jobs and so to that point then what are next steps here because this was at a trial court and so do we expect well I'm I'm almost certain that we're going to see uh all of this get appealed because Trump's team appeals everything and so and so what should we expect now with regard to next steps we should expect an appeal to first of all the federal circuit court of appeals and then ultimately to the Supreme Court regardless of which party wins or loses so you know I do take some comfort and we've talked about this in recent legal breakdown videos um that the last significant ruling handed down by the Supreme Court went against Donald Trump with Chief Justice Rob Roberts and Justice Amy Cony Barrett joining the liberal wing of the court to rule the right way and that was in the US aid case so I'm hopeful that Justice is trending um but we'll have to see what they do with the next case that they accept review of so there will inevitably be an appeal here's the other thing I would look for and this is not necessarily good news but I think it's something that we should front and that is even though OPM didn't have the ability to order the mass firing of these people and even though it was wrongful to lie about these probationary employees and say this was a performance-based termination which really does demean and indeed potentially defame those people and make it harder for them to get employment moving forward so you may see some defamation suits in the future but maybe they can remedy those deficiencies by saying okay we're going to take a step back we're going to give the authority to each agency head to make the determination of which probationary employees should be fired and which should retain their jobs and then we're going to have them follow the procedures which frankly Brian as you kind of hinted at upfront they could have done from the beginning but that really wasn't Trump's Mo going about thoughtfully reducing the of the federal government to perhaps you know cut out a little bit of of bloat from the federal Workforce no he did this for the callousness the cruelty the intimidation in hopes that one these people would shut up and go away well they haven't and two undoubtedly he hopes that this will inspire other good federal employees public servants doing the work of the American people day in and day out to say I don't have the stomach for this this I don't want to work for this Administration I'm out and you know I think he probably has accomplished the the you know retirement the resignation the departure from federal government of lots of good federal government employees who say I don't want to be part of the Trump Administration you know you you mentioned that there may be the prospect of defamation suits moving forward is that in a personal capacity or not because if the if these folks can sue the federal government because they've been famed and they have a good basis to bring these lawsuits and they win and they're awarded monetary damages then isn't it just taxpayers like isn't Donald Trump basically allowed to do whatever he wants knowing full well that he really has no Expo Financial exposure himself it's just us that have to foot the bill for his behavior and so why not just defame these people if he knows he doesn't have to pay for it the suckers mostly in blue states by the way who fund the federal government are the ones who are going to be footing the bill yeah you know you know your rationale that you just explained there I think goes to a lot of what Donald Trump does you know what I may be issuing unlawful or unconstitutional executive orders I may be wrongfully terminating lots of people but you know what if they sue and they win it's just taxpayer money that's going to you know go to make them whole for what I did to them however here's what we have to keep in mind it will only be taxpayer money if what was done to these people the wrongful terminations and the defamation if they have a good cause for defamation only if the government officials who wronged these people were acting within the scope of their official governmental duties the official duties of their job but if they weren't if they were were acting beyond the scope of their official government duties and I think there is a straight-faced claim that they were guess what then they have to defend themselves personally and if the plaintiffs the people wrongfully terminated and defamed win that suit they have to pay damages out of their own Pockets you know that's the kind of incentive that is built into the system of what we called qualified immunity for federal government employees and officials it's an incentive that we build in to try to keep people you know in line in a very real sense to try to keep them acting within the scope of their official governmental duties so they have the protection of qualified immunity but I'll tell you given the rulings of these courts that people are acting lawlessly or unconstitutionally in these you know wrongful terminations that will set them up potentially for personal liability so maybe at the end of the day any damages that have to be paid out will not come from taxpayer money yeah well look I in In fairness I do have to say that if the final Arbiters of whether or not what Trump is doing f is an official act if that's going to be the Supreme Court that doesn't inspire a whole lot of confidence given that it was this very Supreme Court who introduced this idea of presidential immunity I mean that's why Donald Trump wasn't able to be charged with the Insurrection crimes related to to January 6 and so so I you know look I'm not I'm not putting all of my eggs in the basket of hoping that this Supreme Court which has already been wrong on this specific issue is going to do the right thing but it it's worth um keeping an eye on this right now because this is a major issue that we're contending with regarding all of these civil servants being being improperly fired so we will of course stay on top of this for those who are watching right now if you want to follow along and to support Independent Media and our channels more broadly please make sure to subscribe Glenn is very fast approaching a million subscribers so if you're not yet subscribed to his Channel please hit the Subscribe button I'm Brian terer Cohen and I'm Glenn kersner you're watching the legal breakdown [Music]