The federal workforce has been reduced in stages: an executive order deprived civil servants of employment protections;[8][9] a program nudged workers to resign;[10][11] agencies were shut down;[12] and a series of reductions in force (RIF) were planned.[13] Critics argue the layoffs reduced critical services, violated the law,[14] increased the power of the presidency, and stemmed from "deep state" conspiracy theories.[15][16][17][18] The administration said they saved expenditures, reduced regulations, and downsized the government role in society.[19] It has at times rescinded layoff notifications.[20]
We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can't do all of the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so. We want to put them in trauma.
— Future and former Trump OMB Director Russell Vought explains his plans for the federal workforce in 2023.[21]
Vought has also been described as one of Project 2025's architects.[24] In Chapter 2 of the manifesto, Vought writes that the OMB director's role is to "bring the bureaucracy in line with all budgetary, regulatory, and management decisions", a task he would not fulfill if "he lacks knowledge of what the agencies are doing", and so must acquire "sufficient visibility into the deep caverns of agency decision-making".[25]
For Rep. John Rose (R-TN), only Project 2025 explains the flow of executive orders.[26] CNN analyzed the first 53 and found that 36 followed it; Paul Dans, who was OPM's Chief of staff during the first Trump administration and oversaw Project 2025 at the Heritage Foundation, said that it was "exactly the work [Project 2025] set out to do."[27] Politico outlined 37 cases where the orders align with it, some nearly verbatim.[28]
During his campaign for a second term, Trump inveighed against "bureaucrats" who were "destroying this country", saying they were "crooked" and "don't work at all".[18] He promoted conspiracy theories that a "deep state" was actively working against him and America, and promised to remove them when in power.[16][17]
After winning the 2024 presidential election, he tapped Elon Musk, the largest single donor to his campaign,[29] to lead a new initiative, dubbed the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), to carry out mass layoffs and other measures.[30][31][32] Musk has pushed for automation and privatization.[33] Musk celebrated the terminations on social media.[34]
Also on January 28, the administration offered a "deferred-resignation" deal that, by mid-February, about 75,000 federal workers accepted.[35][11]
Firings of probationary employees
On February 13, Charles Ezell, acting director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, signed a directive instructing federal agencies to dismiss probationary employees—generally, federal workers who have held their jobs less than a year, or had been promoted into the excepted service during that time.[36][37] Ezell told agencies to tell the fired employees that their performance was inadequate, and that they needed to cite no evidence.[38]
Depending on the agency, employees were given notices that read that either the agency "no longer has a need for your services,"[39] or it had "determined that you have failed to demonstrate fitness or qualifications for continued employment because your subject matter knowledge, skills and abilities do not meet the department's current needs."[40] Another variant read "unfortunately, the agency finds that you are not fit for continued employment because your ability, knowledge and skills do not fit the Agency's current needs, and your performance has not been adequate to justify further employment at the Agency."[41] Even though a cause was alleged poor performance, some employees had either received the maximum possible rating or had not had their performance reviewed.[41] Others had received "stellar performance evaluations" the previous year.[36]
Reductions in force
On February 13, OMB Director Vought and OPM Acting Director Ezell ordered federal agencies to send them plans by March 13 to slash their workforces through layoffs.[42] They said the agencies "should focus on employees whose jobs are not required in statute and who face furloughs in government shutdowns—typically around one-third of the federal workforce, or 700,000 employees."[43] In May, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction, temporarily pausing the RIF actions across major agencies, calling into question the legal authority of executive-implemented RIF orders.[44]
Rescissions
Following the administration's contract rescission orders, more than 1 million federal workers lost their bargaining rights.[45]
In some cases, the Trump administration subsequently realized that it had laid off people in critical positions and needed to reinstate them, as with Department of Agriculture employees engaged in efforts to combat the spread of the H5N1 bird flu virus and National Nuclear Security Administration employees.[46] Since former federal employees no longer had access to their government email accounts, supervisors were sometimes uncertain how to contact them.[47] The Food and Drug Administration rehired some staff responsible for reviewing medical devices and food safely.[48] Hours after laying off 950 Indian Health Service employees on February 14, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of Health and Human Services, reinstated them.[49]
Legal analysts described such firings as setting up Supreme Court cases that could expand his power over independent executive branch agencies that Congress set up to be insulated from presidential control based on a maximalist interpretation of the unitary executive theory.[50] His actions were described by legal experts as unprecedented or in violation of federal law,[51] and with the intent of replacing employees with workers more aligned with his agenda.[52] Trump criticized and fired officials who reported facts, statistics, and analysis that went against his opinions, and ordered them removed or redone to suit his preferences.[53] In a peer-reviewed journal article, Donald Moynihan described the mass firings as an anti-statist restructuring of American government centered around political loyalty.[54]
Lower courts froze the firings. However, on July 8, 2025, the Supreme Court overrode those orders, thereby allowing the workforce reductions to continue.[55]Politico described the cuts as the largest attempt to reorganize the federal government since the professionalization of the civil service. It described the court's order as marking "a major reversal in the pre-Trump conventional wisdom that federal workers enjoyed significant job protections" and that it would "allow Trump and future presidents going forward to use the threat of layoffs to pressure federal workers to carry out political appointees' orders, or to root out dissenters".[56] The layoffs led to large departures of subject-matter experts resulting in the loss of institutional knowledge and technical expertise from the federal government.[57]
Politico stated that no previous president since the professionalization of the civil service to protect it from political interference has attempted such a large scale reorganization of the federal government. Following the Supreme Court's 8-1 decision that the plaintiffs' attempt to halt such reorganizations without Congressional approval were likely to fail, Politico stated it marked "a major reversal in the pre-Trump conventional wisdom that federal workers enjoyed significant job protections" and that it would "allow Trump and presidents going forward to use the threat of layoffs to pressure federal workers to carry out political appointees' orders, or to root out dissenters".[56]
Demography
As part of Trump's efforts to root out "DEI" initiatives in the federal government, agencies with the highest planned workforce reductions and dismissals were also those with the highest percentages of women, minority, and Black employees.[83] By June 2025, more than 300,000 Black women left the labor force.[84] Christian E. Weller, senior fellow at American Progress and professor of public policy at the McCormack Graduate School of Policy and Global Studies at the University of Massachusetts, the job cuts will disproportionally harm African Americans in the federal government.[85] Over the same period, there was job increases of 142,000 for White women, 176,000 for Hispanic women, and 365,000 for White men.[86]
Trump's firings of senior military officers were disproportionately women,[87] and others sometimes came after conservative organizations targeted specific individuals for criticism.[87] Far-right activist Laura Loomer emerged as what Politico described as a "blunt enforcer of allegiance to Trump", with her operating a "tip line" for staffers to report colleagues for alleged disloyalty. It further described widespread loyalty purges and an atmosphere of "paranoia" within the executive branch, and that it was in line with the ethos of personnel director Sergio Gor and the approach of the Department of Government Efficiency.[88]
Privatization
The Brookings Institution described the firings as setting the stage for greater privatization and automation of the federal government,[89] and Trump appointees had multiple conflicts of interest and financial ties to companies that would benefit as part of an effort to privatize government functions.[90] Particularly, companies were chosen to assist the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that had ties to Trump officials who were chosen in leadership positions at NOAA who both advocated for and stood to benefit financially from the privatization of weather forecasting.[91]
Expertise
The mass layoffs were described as a culmination of Trump and his allies' belief in a "deep state" within the scientific and federal bureaucracy of the United States.[15] The layoffs led to large departures of experts resulting in the loss of institutional knowledge and technical expertise from the federal government.[57][15] According to The New York Times, "state and local governments have been actively recruiting federal workers impacted by the Trump administration's effort to dramatically reduce the federal work force."[92]
Geography
The cuts were particularly felt in federal agencies hubs, like the Kansas City metropolitan area.[93]
Psychological effects
Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson said that the layoffs would also affect remaining workers: "The impact is intimidation and fear".[94] On May 20, 2025, The Washington Post reported that several dozen interviewed by the paper were suffering from panic attacks, depression, and suicidal thoughts.[95]USA Today reported on the chaotic rollout of the mass firings leading to a "roller coaster" of being "fired, rehired and threatened with firing again".[96]
1 2 Madden Blumenfeld, Colleen (July 31, 2025). "Summer Lull Ends: July 2025 Job Cuts Spike to 62,075, Tech, AI & Tariffs Increasingly Blamed". Challenger, Gray & Christmas. Retrieved August 21, 2025. "DOGE Impact" remains the leading reason for job cut announcements in 2025, cited in 289,679 planned layoffs so far this year. This includes direct reductions to the Federal workforce and its contractors. An additional 13,056 cuts have been attributed to DOGE Downstream Impact, such as the loss of funding to private non-profits and affiliated organizations.
↑ Masters, Hamilton Matthew (February 28, 2025). "Rep. John Rose Talks Policy, Forthcoming Gubernatorial Campaign". Nashville Scene. Retrieved March 6, 2025. How do you think the president was prepared to issue all these executive orders? How do you think they were prepared to make all of these appointments in such quick succession after he got into office? Project 2025.
↑ Contorno, Steve; Tolan, Casey (January 31, 2025). "Trump said he hadn't read Project 2025 – but most of his early executive orders overlap with its proposals". CNN. Retrieved February 21, 2025. This is exactly the work we set out to do," Paul Dans, who oversaw Project 2025 at the conservative Heritage Foundation, told CNN in an interview Wednesday. "It's still in the early first stages of bearing fruit, but we wanted to make sure the president was ready to hit the ground running on day one. The rapidity and the depth of what they've rolled out this quickly is a testament to the work done in Project 2025 and other presidential transition projects.
↑ Flavelle, Christopher; Gaffney, Austyn; Baker, Camille; Swanson, Ana (February 27, 2025). "Mass Layoffs Begin at NOAA". The New York Times. Archived from the original on February 28, 2025. Retrieved February 28, 2025.
↑ Toosi, Nahal; Sentner, Irie; Johansen, Ben; Cai, Sophia (February 27, 2025). "Next on the chopping block: State". POLITICO. Archived from the original on February 28, 2025. Retrieved March 11, 2025.
1 2 Min Kim, Seung; Miller, Zeke; Mascaro, Lisa (May 9, 2025). "President Trump fires Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden". The Associated Press. Retrieved May 11, 2025. The only two women serving as four-star officers, as well as a disproportionate number of other senior female officers, have also been fired.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
