In a pointed ruling that offered sharp words for President Donald Trump’s administration, a federal judge this week denounced what she called “seemingly baseless claims” against federal workers and described the administration’s rhetoric about mass government firings as “a slap in the face” to longtime public servants.
The case stems from a lawsuit filed by Democracy Forward, a legal watchdog group, over the Trump administration’s refusal to expedite records related to a 2018 executive order calling for widespread reductions in the federal workforce.
That directive instructed agencies to “promptly undertake preparations to initiate large-scale reductions in force,” raising alarms about the future of civil service employment and the functioning of federal agencies.
Democracy Forward filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking documents that could shed light on how the plan would be implemented.
They argued for expedited processing due to the significant public interest and the potential harm of delay. When the government failed to act swiftly, the group sued, seeking a preliminary injunction to compel the production of the records by a court-imposed deadline.
Judge Calls Out Harmful Bureaucratic Rhetoric
U.S. District Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan ultimately denied the group’s request for a preliminary injunction, ruling that the legal standard for expedited FOIA requests had not been met.
However, in a strongly worded 25-page opinion, Sooknanan openly criticized the Trump-era narrative that painted civil servants as lazy or ineffective and federal programs as wasteful.
“The seemingly baseless claims of unproductive federal employees and tax dollars being siphoned off to fund useless government programs have led to widespread confusion and panic,” she wrote. “This rhetoric is a slap in the face to hardworking federal employees across our country, many of whom have spent their entire careers serving the American people.”
Though Sooknanan acknowledged that the case involved “information of immense public importance,” she concluded that Democracy Forward had not identified a sufficiently imminent event justifying the extraordinary relief of expedited FOIA processing.
Expedited FOIA Requests Are Rare, Judge Says
Citing Congress’s narrow criteria for expedited FOIA requests, the judge emphasized that such requests are rarely granted unless tied to urgent events that risk rendering the requested records obsolete.
The law, she added, is designed to preserve fairness for all public records requestors.
“Although Democracy Forward seeks information of immense public importance, at least on this record, it has not identified a sufficiently imminent event that would justify expediting its broad FOIA requests,” she explained.
Sooknanan stressed that her ruling “says nothing” about whether the government will ultimately be compelled to turn over the requested documents—only that the group’s request did not merit jumping ahead of others in line.
Legal Battle Continues
While this ruling is a setback for Democracy Forward, their broader legal push to hold the Trump administration accountable for bureaucratic overhauls is far from over.
The organization has not disclosed whether it will appeal the decision but reiterated its commitment to government transparency.
Judge Sooknanan’s remarks nonetheless stand as a rebuke to the former president’s aggressive reshaping of the federal workforce—and a defense of the public servants whose work underpins the functioning of American government.
