This one's a little bit easier. It'll get more complicated. Again, like this EO is only approved to allow for the planning. I think the vote might be closer. I think there's still a majority on the Supreme Court for the actual implementation, but it may not be eight one when there's a specific plan that has to navigate its way through the courts again.
On July 8, 2025, the Supreme Court granted the government’s emergency application to stay a preliminary injunction against President Trump’s broad workforce‑reduction Executive Order 14210 and an OMB/OPM memorandum. That 8–1 order allowed agencies to plan and begin large‑scale reductions in force, while explicitly stating the Court expressed “no view on the legality of any Agency RIF and Reorganization Plan” produced under the order. (scotusblog.com)
On July 14, 2025, in McMahon v. New York (No. 24A1203), the Court considered a specific large‑scale reduction in force at the Department of Education, which sought to eliminate roughly half the department’s workforce pursuant to Trump’s education‑reorganization executive order (and related RIF directives). The Court granted a stay of the district court’s injunction, thereby allowing the Education Department’s mass layoffs and restructuring to proceed while litigation continues—i.e., it ruled in favor of allowing implementation of this specific plan. (caselaw.findlaw.com)
Contemporaneous reporting on that July 14 order states that the vote was 6–3, with all three liberal justices (Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson) in dissent. This is a narrower margin than the earlier 8–1 ruling on the general RIF planning order. (upi.com)
Taken together, these events match Sacks’s prediction: once a concrete, large‑scale RIF plan under Trump’s workforce‑reduction program reached the Supreme Court, the Court again allowed it to move forward, and the vote was indeed closer than the original 8–1 decision.