A federal judge ruled that Homeland Security officials exceeded their authority by directing FEMA to develop a plan cutting its workforce in half, finding that Congress had placed key staffing decisions with the disaster agency itself.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom.
A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration unlawfully directed the Federal Emergency Management Agency to develop a plan cutting its workforce by 50%, siding with labor groups that challenged the effort as an improper attempt by the Department of Homeland Security to control FEMA staffing.
U.S. District Judge Susan Illston concluded Friday that DHS officials directed FEMA leadership to prepare for a 50% workforce reduction despite objections from officials inside the disaster-response agency. The reduction ultimately was not fully implemented.
“Frankly, the FEMA staffing plan number appears as if pulled from thin air,” Illston wrote.
The dispute formed part of a broader lawsuit brought by the American Federation of Government Employees and other labor organizations challenging Trump administration efforts to reduce the federal workforce.
At issue was not simply whether FEMA could reduce staffing, but which agency had legal authority to make that determination.
Illston found that protections enacted by Congress following Hurricane Katrina placed responsibility for FEMA staffing and operational decisions with FEMA and restricted DHS from substantially diminishing the agency’s functions. The judge determined that Homeland Security officials improperly displaced FEMA’s authority by directing the agency toward the 50% target.
The court record showed that the administration’s staffing initiative also affected FEMA’s Cadre of On-Call Response/Recovery Employees, known as CORE personnel, whose temporary appointments historically could be renewed by FEMA supervisors. CORE employees make up a substantial portion of the agency’s disaster-response workforce.
Illston did not immediately prescribe a specific remedy. Instead, she directed the parties to confer over what relief should follow from the ruling.
FEMA said Saturday that it would not address personnel matters or continuing litigation but maintained that the agency is prepared for upcoming disasters.
“DHS and FEMA are ready for the 2026 hurricane season,” the agency said.
“We’re ensuring workforce stability and a strong, deployable force for upcoming national events and potential disasters; making the agency leaner, faster and laser-focused on supporting state, local, tribal and territorial partners before, during and after disasters,” FEMA said. “FEMA continues to maintain a roster of experienced leadership and support staff across headquarters and regional offices.”
The 50% reduction was never completed, and FEMA has rehired some employees following leadership changes at both FEMA and DHS, according to the Associated Press.
The controversy developed as FEMA was already experiencing significant workforce turnover.
An August Government Accountability Office review found that more than 4,300 FEMA employees separated from the agency during fiscal 2025, representing approximately 17% of its workforce and a 55% increase in departures compared with the previous year. FEMA employed an average of approximately 25,134 people during that fiscal year.
The departures included employees who left through voluntary workforce-reduction programs, probationary employees who were terminated and CORE workers whose contracts were not renewed. FEMA also operated under a hiring freeze from January 2025 until May 2026, according to GAO.
The agency nevertheless hired approximately 2,900 people during the period as thousands of others departed.
GAO said FEMA officials reported that the reductions resulted in a “loss of institutional knowledge and experienced personnel” and “exacerbated longstanding workforce challenges.”
Investigators also found that FEMA had made staffing reductions without conducting the type of strategic workforce analysis needed to determine how many employees and what skills the agency required to fulfill its disaster-response mission.
The watchdog warned that without such planning, “FEMA cannot be assured that the agency is positioned to effectively meet its mission needs.” GAO recommended that Congress consider requiring FEMA to base major workforce decisions on a more formal strategic planning process.
The administration’s broader effort to restructure FEMA has continued alongside the workforce dispute.
A FEMA Review Council created by Trump submitted its final recommendations in May. An earlier December 2025 draft reviewed by The Associated Press had included a proposal to cut FEMA staffing by 50%, but the final report abandoned that specific target and instead called for a “strategic review” to determine “appropriate staffing levels.”
FEMA has also faced disruptions involving grant programs, disaster assistance and employee departures as the administration has sought to reduce the federal government’s size and reconsider how disaster responsibilities should be divided between Washington and the states.
Illston’s ruling does not prohibit FEMA from restructuring or changing staffing levels. Instead, it addresses who has the authority to make those decisions and whether they must comply with legal protections Congress enacted after Hurricane Katrina.
For the labor groups challenging the administration, the decision establishes that DHS could not simply impose a predetermined 50% reduction on FEMA.
The next step will be determining what relief, if any, is required now that the court has found the staffing directive unlawful.
Original article
Comments