Same Questions in DOGE Restraining Order Affect CPSC Situation

Who is encroaching on whose constitutional powers is the question that will ultimately determine if the DOGE process can continue. On one hand is an assertion in a May 9 temporary restraining order (bit.ly/4m9L4hf) that Congress must be part of largescale restructuring of the executive branch.

On the other is an assertion in the May 12 Justice Department appeal (bit.ly/3F9UzMz) that the court is overstepping its powers because the plaintiffs should have brought the case on the firings of federal workers to the Merit System Protection Board. That body is part of the executive branch. More broadly, the appeal argues that the court is stopping the executive branch from exercising its powers.

CPSC's situation was not part the case, which deals with earlier DOGE activity at other agencies. The order and DOGE arriving at CPSC (PSL, 4/12/25) occurred about a day apart. Nonetheless, rulings about the lines between the branches of government – involving DOGE or otherwise – will affect CPSC as much as other agencies.

Indeed, in issuing the order, Judge Susan Illston acknowledged that effects of decisions in this case do and will flow beyond the named parties. About the order, she wrote:

"Providing relief beyond the named parties is appropriate where necessary to provide relief to the named parties…The Court has found that plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their challenges…The Court acknowledges that its temporary restraining order…provide relief beyond the named parties, but to do otherwise is impracticable and unworkable, particularly where the agencies' [Reduction in Force] plans largely remain secret… [It is] necessary to temporarily enjoin further implementation of those plans because they flow from likely illegal directives."

Her next step is a May 22 hearing that might result in a preliminary injunction while the case proceeds. The court is the U.S. district court in San Francisco.

The Justice Department appeal is to the 9th Circuit, which includes U.S. district courts in California.

The case number is e 3:25-cv-03698.