Days before the Trump administration was supposed to file its response to a California lawsuit challenging its attack on gender-affirming care providers, lawyers for the U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal judge to temporarily halt the proceedings.
They argued that, given the federal shutdown, they simply did not have the lawyers to do the job.
“Justice Department attorneys and employees of federal defendants are prohibited from working, even on a voluntary basis, except in very limited circumstances, including 'emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property,'” they wrote in their filing on Oct. 1, the first day of the shutdown.
The district judge presiding over the case, which California brought in federal court in Massachusetts along with a coalition of other Democratic-led states, agreed and quickly granted the request.
It was just one example of the weeks-long federal shutdown that has halted major litigation between California and the Trump administration, in political battles with major implications for people's lives.
On the same day, in the same Massachusetts court, Justice Department lawyers were granted a break in a lawsuit in which California and other states are challenging mass layoffs at the U.S. Department of Education, after noting that the department's funding had been suspended and it was not known “when Congress will restore such funding.”
On the same day, in the United States District Court in Central California, the Trump administration requested a similar pause in a lawsuit it had filed against California, challenging the state's refusal to provide its voter registration lists to the administration.
Justice Department attorneys wrote that they “greatly regret any disruption caused to the Court and other litigants” but needed to pause the proceedings until they were “permitted to resume their regular civil litigation duties.”
The central California court has since advised the parties of alternative dispute resolution options and outside groups, including the NAACP, have filed motions to intervene in the case, but there have been no major developments.
The pauses in litigation — just a fraction of those that have occurred in courts across the country — were an example of the radical, real, high-stakes effects of the federal government shutdown that average Americans may not consider when thinking about the shutdown's impact on their lives.
Federal employees working in security and other crucial roles, such as air traffic controllers, have remained in their jobs, even without pay, but many others have been forced to stay home. The Justice Department did not specify which of its lawyers had been benched by the shutdown, but made clear that some of those who had been working on the cases in question were no longer doing so.
Federal litigation often takes years to resolve, and brief breaks in proceedings are not uncommon. However, prolonged disruptions (such as those that could occur if the shutdown is prolonged) would take their toll, preventing legal responses in some of the country's most important political battles.
California Lawyer. Gen. Rob Bonta, whose office has sued the Trump administration more than 40 times since January, has not challenged all requests for a pause by the Trump administration, especially in cases where the status quo favors the state.
However, it has challenged pauses in other cases, with some success.
For example, in that same federal court in Massachusetts on October 1, Justice Department lawyers asked a judge to temporarily halt proceedings in a case in which California and other states are suing to block the administration's selective defunding of Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers.
Their arguments were the same as in the other cases: given the closure, they did not have the lawyers to do the necessary legal work.
In response, lawyers from California and other states responded, pointing out that the shutdown had not stopped Department of Health and Human Services officials from moving forward with the move to defund Planned Parenthood, so the states' residents remained at imminent risk of losing necessary health care.
“The risks of irreparable harm are especially high because it is unclear how long the disruption to allocations will last, meaning aid may not be available for months, at which point numerous health care facilities will likely be forced to close due to lack of funding,” the states argued.
On October 8, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani denied the government's request for a pause, finding that the states' interest in continuing the case “outweighs” the administration's interest in pausing it.
Talwani's argument, in part, was that his order denying a pause would give Justice Department officials the legal authority to continue litigating the case despite the shutdown.
Bonta said in a statement that “Trump owns this shutdown” and “the devastation it is causing to everyday American workers,” adding that his office will not allow Trump to use it to cause even more damage by delaying help in court cases.
“We will not allow your administration to use this shutdown as an excuse to continue implementing its illegal agenda unchecked. Until we get relief for Californians, we will not back down, and neither will the courts,” Bonta said. “We can't wait for Trump to finally allow our government to reopen before these cases are heard.”
Trump and Republicans in Congress have blamed the shutdown on Democrats.
