Federal Employee Unions Sue to Stop Trump’s “Fork Directive” Scheme

Four of the nation’s largest public employee unions filed a federal lawsuit to challenge the Trump administration’s latest attack on career civil servants. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts and brought by Democracy Forward, seeks to halt the administration’s attempt to coerce mass resignations of federal employees under the so-called “Fork Directive.”

Under this unlawful program, federal workers were given a stark choice: resign immediately in exchange for a dubious promise of continued pay and benefits or risk termination without compensation. Employees were given little more than a week to decide, with a deadline of February 6—without clear guidance on how the government would fund these payments or what rights they would forfeit by resigning.

The Trump administration’s directive destabilizes the federal workforce and replaces experienced civil servants with political loyalists. The program:

• Violates Federal Law: Violates the Antideficiency Act by making financial promises without a congressional appropriation.
• Creates Chaos and Confusion: The administration provided misleading and ever-changing guidance, leaving employees without the information needed to make informed decisions.
• Threatens Essential Government Services: From Social Security benefits to national security operations, the forced departure of experienced professionals would undermine public services.
• Undermines Merit-Based Civil Service: The administration’s goal is to replace impartial experts with partisan appointees, endangering government integrity.

On the same day of the deadline, February 6, the unions requested a temporary restraining order to protect federal employees from immediate harm. The federal court granted a temporary pause on the directive, preventing the administration from forcing employees into rash resignations.

On February 10, the court extended the temporary restraining order and put the deadline on hold.

On February 12, the Court dissolved a temporary restraining order and denied the request to block the directive while the case was being discussed. Now, the case will develop while the “fork directive” remains effective.