• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

Silencing Science Tracker

  • Tracker
  • About
  • Resources

4,200 Federal Employees Fired during Government Shutdown

Action Date: 10/10/2025

Explanation: Personnel Changes
Scientists Affected: Climate, Other
Agency(s):
Federal → DOE
Federal → EPA
Federal → HHS
Federal → NOAA (Commerce Department)
Presidential Administration: Trump Administration (Second)

On October 10, 2025, the Trump administration began issuing reduction-in-force, or RIF, notices to thousands of federal employees. The notices, sent to approximately 4,200 employees across at least seven agencies, were issued during the federal government shutdown, which began on October 1.

Notably, at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 1,300 staff members received reduction-in-force (RIF) notices, though about 700 were rescinded shortly thereafter. Overall, the cuts affected more than a dozen CDC divisions, including the director’s office at the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, the office of the director at the Global Health Center, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report publishing team, the Epidemic Intelligence Service, and the Laboratory Leadership Service. Other agencies were also affected, including the Department of Energy offices that deal with renewable energy, energy efficiency, and other topics.

The administration cited the government shutdown and the subsequent lack of funding as the reason for the firings, but some experts disagree. Jessica Riedl from the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, stated, “[t]here is no statute requiring them to lay off a substantial share of federal employees during a temporary government shutdown. That statute doesn’t exist, and such practice has not occurred during previous shutdowns.”

Updates:

Reversed (Partially or Fully), Litigation Update

On October 11, hundreds of CDC employees began receiving emails informing them that the RIF notices were being rescinded and that they would not be terminated. It is estimated that more than half of the termination notices sent to CDC staff were rescinded.

On October 15, federal judge Judge Susan Illston temporarily halted the layoffs, stating in a hearing that she believes the plaintiffs are likely to prove that the Trump administration’s use of the lapse in government spending to fire employees is “both illegal and in excess of authority and is arbitrary and capricious.”

The lawsuit, which was brought by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), which together represent more than 800,000 federal workers, accuses the administration of “using federal employees as pawns to impose political pressure on the Administration’s perceived opponents in Congress.”

The temporary restraining order suspends the implementation of layoffs already underway and prevents additional terminations from being sent to federal employees at the more than 30 federal agencies represented by AFGE and AFSCME.

HHS has halted RIFs for all agency employees in accordance with the temporary restraining order issued on October 15. Initially, Deputy Assistant Secretary Thomas Nagy claimed that 982 fired employees were not covered because they weren’t represented by the unions involved in the suit. However, on October 17, Judge Susan Illston clarified in an emergency hearing that the order applies to members of all relevant bargaining units, including those impacted by a March executive order that prohibits numerous federal agencies from recognizing collective bargaining units.

On November 17, 2025, HHS deputy assistant secretary for human resources Thomas Nagy Jr. emailed all 954 HHS employees who had received RIF notifications, telling them to return to work on their next regularly scheduled day.

© 2026 · Sabin Center for Climate Change Law

The materials on this website are intended to provide a general summary of the law and do not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.