In a decisive ruling that safeguards a key component of the nation’s disaster response, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston found the Trump administration’s directive to dramatically reduce FEMA’s on‑call workforce unlawful. The decision, filed on Friday, underscores the administration’s obligation to follow statutory limits on altering FEMA’s authority.
Judge cites unlawful revocation of contract renewal authority
Judge Illston held that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” when it stripped FEMA of its power to renew contracts for the Cadre of On‑Call Response and Recovery (CORE) teams. CORE workers, who comprise roughly 40% of FEMA’s staff, are the first federal responders on the ground during hurricanes and other large‑scale disasters, overseeing aid distribution and long‑term funding to states and local communities.
Historically, CORE members serve two‑to‑four‑year contracts that are routinely renewed. In 2025, the Trump administration pursued an aggressive effort to downsize the federal government, prompting DHS to limit FEMA’s contract renewals to 180‑day terms while a long‑term reduction plan was considered. In January, DHS instructed FEMA to allow some contracts to lapse, effectively forcing employees out as their terms expired.
Legal background and statutory constraints
While FEMA operates under DHS, a 2006 law explicitly states that the homeland security secretary “may not substantially or significantly reduce” FEMA’s “authorities, responsibilities, or functions.” Judge Illston noted that DHS was exempt from the administration’s January 2025 hiring freeze, yet the department interpreted the freeze to include CORE contract renewals, a stretch beyond the law’s intent.
“There is no evidence in the record reflecting a reasoned decision for this about‑face or for the subsequent conditions DHS placed on FEMA’s renewal authority,” Illston wrote, emphasizing the lack of a factual basis for the abrupt policy shift.
Union victory and next steps
The ruling is a critical win for the American Federation of Government Employees and the AFL‑CIO, the labor unions that filed the lawsuit. While the judge did not order an immediate reinstatement of all affected workers, she barred the administration from relying on prior testimony that denied the staffing reduction plan and instructed the parties to negotiate appropriate relief.
Unions had sought rescission of all non‑renewal notices issued to CORE employees since the start of the year and a return to their positions, as well as an end to any plan to cut half of FEMA’s workforce. Illston indicated that broad relief would be premature, noting that FEMA is no longer systematically refusing to renew CORE contracts and there is no current indication of a half‑staff reduction. Nonetheless, she affirmed that DHS continues to usurp FEMA’s authority by imposing 180‑day contract limits.
Signal messaging controversy
In a separate finding, the judge criticized former acting FEMA head Karen Evans and former DHS deputy chief of staff Joseph Guy for their handling of Signal messages, a secure messaging app. Evans created a Signal chat relevant to the case and set messages to auto‑delete after four weeks. After becoming a defendant, she shortened the auto‑delete timer and later backed up the messages in April 2026, after the most timely content had already been erased. Illston concluded that Evans’ actions were intentional and violated federal law and department policy.
“Evans should have known better,” the judge wrote, noting Evans’ prior role as DHS Chief Information Officer responsible for records preservation.
FEMA’s response
FEMA’s spokesperson reiterated the agency’s commitment to maintaining experienced leadership and support staff across headquarters and regional offices. “We’re ensuring workforce stability and a strong, deployable force for upcoming national events and potential disasters; making the agency leaner, faster and laser‑focused on supporting state, local, tribal and territorial partners before, during and after disasters,” the statement read.
The court’s decision reinforces the principle that federal agencies must operate within the bounds of congressional authority, especially when critical emergency response capabilities are at stake.
Original reporting: KTVZ (Central Oregon) — read the source article.
