Mass firings and restructuring at the US Department of Health and Human Services that Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced in March won’t go forward while a lawsuit testing their legality continues, a federal court said.
Nineteen states and the District of Columbia demonstrated they’re likely to win on the merits of their claims, including that Kennedy’s proposed cuts violate the Administrative Procedure Act because they’re arbitrary, capricious, and unsupported by the evidence, the US District Court for the District of Rhode Island said Tuesday.
The states also showed they’ll be irreparably harmed as a result of the agency’s major restructuring because they’ll be unable to continue health programs funded by the federal government if the plan goes forward, Judge Melissa R. DuBose said in a decision blocking the secretary’s action prior to trial.
“The Executive Branch does not have the authority to order, organize, or implement wholesale changes to the structure and function of the agencies created by Congress,” DuBose said in finding the secretary likely violated separation of powers principles.
New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), whose office is lead counsel in the suit, praised the decision.
“HHS is the backbone of our nation’s public health and social safety net—from cancer screenings and maternal health to early childhood education and domestic violence prevention,” she said.
“Today’s order guarantees these programs and services will remain accessible and halts the administration’s attempt to sabotage our nation’s health care system,” James said.
But HHS “strongly” disagreed with the decision. “HHS remains committed to modernizing a health workforce that for too long prioritized institutional preservation over meaningful public health impact,” said HHS director of communications Andrew Nixon.
HHS stands by its “original decision to realign this organization with its core mission and refocus a sprawling bureaucracy that, over time, had become wasteful, inefficient, and resistant to change,” Nixon said. “The reorganization was designed to restore the department around bold, measurable public health goals—like reversing the chronic disease epidemic and advancing US leadership in biomedical research,” he said.
This is one of multiple lawsuits challenging the Trump administration’s attempt to reduce the size of the federal government. HHS is facing other suits for cutting funds for gender-affirming care and public health-care programs such as those that provide family planning and teen pregnancy prevention services.
Procedural Questions
DuBose rejected HHS’ procedural challenges to the lawsuit, saying the states had standing and weren’t required to “channel” their claims to the Merit Systems Protection Board, which usually handles federal employee disputes.
The court also held that the states weren’t required by the Tucker Act to bring their suit in the US Court of Federal Claims. HHS attorneys raised this argument after the US Supreme Court stayed an injunction against US Department of Education grant terminations, analogizing the grants to contracts. The Tucker Act provides the exclusive remedy for plaintiffs alleging breach of contract against the US.
HHS’ employee terminations and restructuring weren’t analogous to contract actions, DuBose said. The states didn’t ask for the government to pay out past-due grant obligation or continue paying obligations as they accrued, she said.
“Simply put, the Tucker Act plays no role here,” DuBose said.
MAHA Changes
At the end of 2024, HHS employed about 82,000 people and was responsible for 26% of all federal spending, according to DuBose. But, as part of his “Make America Healthy Again” agenda, Kennedy announced in March that he planned a reduction-in-force of 10,000 full-time employees, reduce 28 divisions to 15, and create a new division called the Administration for Health America, DuBose said.
Employees were locked out of their email accounts and access to HHS-issued laptops and facilities April 1. They were told the layoffs would become final June 2.
Kennedy said in an interview soon after that it was more efficient to implement the RIFS immediately, with the understanding that mistakes would be made, then go back and fix them later, the judge said. Since then, nearly 800 RIF notices have been rescinded.
The states’ May 5 complaint targeted the terminations and closures at four subagencies—the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Center for Tobacco Products, the Office of Head Start, and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. They moved for a preliminary injunction May 9, calling the moves a “dismantling” of the health agency.
New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) is lead counsel for the states. The US Department of Justice represents the federal defendants.
The case is New York v. Kennedy, D.R.I., No. 25-196, 7/1/25.
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story: