The Trump administration could be approved by a federal judge later this week, when the lawyers along with the Department of Justice advised a federal judge on Tuesday evening that they would not provide a top administration officer for the oath testimony.
The US District Judge Charles Alsup had demanded a testimony to the mass firing of the employees under the Personnel Management (OPM) office, Charles Azel, on Thursday.
But DOJ said on Tuesday that he would not provide Azel for testimony.
By making Azel unavailable, DOJ Attorney also withdrew his affidavit, a step that Judge Charles Alsup suggested that the Trump administration would lose the case, including the validity of firing thousands of probation employees.
DOJ lawyers argued, “Live testimony of Mr. Azel is also not necessary as a factual case, as the existing documentary evidence and briefing suggests that OPM is not directing agencies to eliminate probationary employees,” DOJ lawyers argued.
A group of federal unions alleged that Azel lied in the announcement of a swearing -in, that his office did not order the firing of the probationary employees on the basis of “demonstrations or misconduct”, or ordered Judge Alsup to order Azel on Thursday in San Francisco and under the oath.
The Trump administration attempted to push back on the order – arguing in a filing on Monday that the testimony “enhances fundamental constitutional concerns.”
A scene suggests that the logo of the Personnel Management Office (OPM) was fired in a conference call after probationary employees in the OPM and Washington, DC, out of the OPM in February 13, 2025, was given less than an hour to leave the building.
Tierni L. Cross/Reuters
Judge Alsup refused his request to cancel the hearing late Monday night.
Judge Alsup wrote in an order on Monday night, “The problem here is that Acting Director Ejel announced an oath in support of the defendant’s position, but now refused to investigate the cross or was removed.”
The plaintiff alleges that on 13 February, Azel called a phone call with the heads of the federal agencies to direct them to end thousands of federal employees and “incorrectly stated that the expiration is due to reasons.”
In a swearing -in last month, Azel refused to direct the termination based on the reasons for the performance, instead arguing that the OPM issued guidance to individual agencies only about the need of probationary workers, to demonstrate that the government continues to continue to employ them.
“The OPM did not direct the agencies to abolish any particular probationary employees on the basis of performance or misconduct, and in this case the plaintiff described it,” Azel wrote.
Groups challenging firing in the court say this was a lie, and Judge Alsup was keen to agree during the court hearing last month.
Judge Alsup said, “How can such a sudden part of the work force be suddenly? It is so irregular and so widespread and so wider than the history of our country.” “How can it be to do something to do everything with each agency?”
“I don’t believe,” said the judge. “I believe that he was instructed or ordered to do so by OPM in that telephone call. In this way, indicate evidence.”
There are allegations about large -scale firing when the investigation has increased in the investigation about the role of the government’s efficiency department in reducing the size of the federal government before the Trump administration. During a cabinet meeting last week, Trump told the heads of federal agencies that they are in charge of cutting their own departments rather than Elon Musk and Dogi.
I am a passionate digital marketer, content writer, and blogger. With years of experience in crafting compelling content and driving digital strategies. I’m always exploring new trends, optimizing strategies, and creating content that resonates with audiences. When I’m not working, you’ll find me diving into the latest digital marketing insights or experimenting with new blogging ideas.