OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Et Al. v. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO

Background

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) published new personnel rules to give agencies more weight to merit and less to seniority. Congress responded by passing a resolution and later continuing appropriations that temporarily barred implementation funding, setting a fixed effective date for the rules. A federal employees union sought emergency relief in the District Court just days before the rules would take effect; the District Court denied the temporary restraining order, and the union appealed to the Court of Appeals.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Court of Appeals could immediately review the District Court’s denial of emergency relief and issue a stay preventing implementation. The opinion explains that denials of temporary emergency orders are ordinarily not appealable and that the exceptions relied on by the Court of Appeals did not apply here. The Court of Appeals’ citations (including a footnote from Sampson and earlier circuit decisions) were found inapplicable because the District Court denied relief rather than granting an extraordinary order that would irreversibly alter the status quo. The Chief Justice, acting as Circuit Justice, concluded the appeals court lacked jurisdiction and therefore had no authority to issue the administrative stay.

Real world impact

The Supreme Court vacated the Court of Appeals’ stay and left the matter for the District Court to decide the preliminary injunction. That means the appeals court cannot short-circuit the normal trial-court process in similar situations, and the question whether the new OPM rules may be blocked will be decided in the district court proceeding.