Anticipated RIF list unveils minimal novel insights concerning administration cuts
The Trump administration's planned Reduction-in-Force (RIF) actions across 17 federal agencies, involving about 40 separate RIF initiatives, have been the subject of intense legal and public scrutiny.
In June 2025, the administration told the Supreme Court that these RIFs were in progress and subject to a preliminary injunction halting them. However, the administration later softened its position, stating that many of these RIFs were not finalized, were only at early planning stages, or would no longer proceed.
Despite the court order from U.S. District Judge Susan Illston requiring disclosure of the RIF and reorganization plans, the administration has refused to release these documents, citing privilege. This has led to accusations that the administration is shielding the workforce reduction plans from public and judicial scrutiny.
Judge Illston ruled that the government's interest in non-disclosure, invoking the deliberative process privilege, is outweighed by the need for accurate fact-finding about the workforce cuts. The administration is contesting this and may seek to limit what is disclosed through redactions.
The agencies involved in the 40-RIF "estimate" include the General Services Administration, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Department of Treasury, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Interior, Department of Transportation, Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, U.S. Agency for Global Media, Department of Commerce, Department of Labor, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Institute of Museum and Library Services, National Archives and Records Administration, National Endowment for Humanities, Department of State, U.S. African Development Foundation, and the Woodrow Wilson Center.
Noah Peters, a senior advisor to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), stated that the 40 RIFs were an estimate and were based on the number of agencies that had requested waivers. The court is of the view that the final versions of the ARRPs at the 17 agencies referenced before the Supreme Court are not covered by the deliberative process privilege.
The government has no central count of how many employees were involved in RIFs under the Executive Order. Agencies such as State, Education, and Health and Human Services have begun some staff cuts following a Supreme Court decision allowing RIFs to proceed, while others like the Department of Veterans Affairs have reduced planned cuts or opted for attrition instead of formal RIFs.
The OPM and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) required agencies to submit ARRPs earlier in 2025, but these plans remain flexible living documents subject to change as agencies assess staffing needs. Whether the plans will ultimately become public remains uncertain, as the administration continues to argue with federal unions over whether details behind the "40 RIFs in 17 agencies" should be made public.
The high court granted the administration's stay application on July 8, temporarily pausing Judge Illston's order. Attorneys for the federal union plaintiffs are still arguing for the release of the full RIF and reorganization plans. Judge Illston has indicated she is inclined to reject the government's argument that it should be allowed to withhold the plans because they are sensitive and predecisional.
The list of federal agencies where reductions in force (RIFs) had been planned was made public on Thursday. The administration fought to keep both the details and the list of agencies secret, stating they were "predecisional" documents. The court finds persuasive plaintiffs' arguments about the qualified nature of the privilege, pushing for transparency and legal compliance. The ongoing legal battle highlights the administration's efforts to keep their workforce reduction plans hidden from the public eye.
- As the administration continues its legal battle over the release of Reduction-in-Force (RIF) and reorganization plans, it has become evident that the federal workforce, which includes agencies such as the Department of Treasury, Department of Labor, and Department of Health and Human Services, among others, could potentially be affected by the reimagined business strategies.
- The ongoing court proceedings have brought the importance of financial transparency into focus, as legal arguments were made regarding the need for public and judicial scrutiny of the financial implications associated with the RIF actions, which involve 17 federal agencies and an estimated 40 separate initiatives.
