Listen to the article
Federal Workers Sue Trump Administration Over Altered Email Messages During Shutdown
A federal workers union has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging that U.S. Department of Education employees had their out-of-office email messages altered without consent to include partisan language about the government shutdown.
The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), represented by Democracy Forward and Public Citizen Litigation Group, accused the administration of taking “unprecedented lengths” to leverage government infrastructure to “shift the public debate in its favor.”
“This whole-of-government approach to partisan messaging is unprecedented, and it makes a mockery of statutory prohibitions like the Hatch Act,” the complaint states. “Especially pernicious, however, are the Administration’s efforts to co-opt the voices of rank-and-file employees in the nonpartisan civil service to take part in political messaging.”
The lawsuit emerged after furloughed employees discovered their automated responses had been changed to include language that explicitly blamed Democrats for the shutdown. Five civil servants, not political appointees, provided copies of their altered messages to NBC News on Thursday, expressing surprise at the modifications made without their knowledge.
The modified email responses contained a political message stating: “On September 10, 2025, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 5371, a clean continuing resolution. Unfortunately, Democrat Senators are blocking passage of H.R. 5371 in the Senate which has led to a lapse in appropriations.”
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, condemned the practice, saying, “The Trump-Vance administration is losing the blame game for the shutdown, so they’re using every tactic to try to fool the American people, including taking advantage of furloughed civil servants.”
“Posting messages without consent to broadcast messages on behalf of a partisan agenda is a blatant violation of First Amendment rights,” Perryman added.
When questioned about the altered email responses, Madi Biedermann, the Department of Education’s deputy assistant secretary for communications, defended the practice by stating: “The email reminds those who reach out to Department of Education employees that we cannot respond because Senate Democrats are refusing to vote for a clean CR and fund the government. Where’s the lie?”
The Education Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding the lawsuit on Friday night.
AFGE President Everett Kelley highlighted the compounded hardship for federal workers, noting that they are “suffering financially by going without a salary due to this politically motivated government shutdown” while simultaneously having their First Amendment rights violated through unauthorized messaging.
This legal action represents the second lawsuit filed by AFGE against the Trump administration in relation to the shutdown. Earlier this week, AFGE and another union representing state and local employees sued over the administration’s threats of potential mass firings of federal workers.
The latest complaint argues that “the cynical use of federal employees as a pawn in Congressional deliberations should be declared unlawful and enjoined by this Court.”
The shutdown has raised broader concerns about executive authority over the federal workforce. While legal experts have questioned the president’s ability to lay off “thousands” of employees during a government shutdown, administration officials maintain such actions fall within presidential authority to approve “reductions in force.”
Rachel Cauley, a spokesperson for the Office of Management and Budget, defended this position, stating: “Issuing RIFs is an excepted activity to fulfill the President’s constitutional authority to supervise and control the Executive Branch, similar to conducting foreign policy.”
The case underscores the intensifying tensions between federal workers and the administration as the government shutdown continues, placing civil servants in the crosshairs of partisan messaging while they remain unable to work or receive compensation.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
11 Comments
This is a serious allegation of government overreach and abuse of power. The public deserves transparency and accountability from federal agencies, not partisan messaging campaigns. I hope this lawsuit leads to a thorough investigation and corrective action.
Agreed. Tampering with government employee email to push partisan narratives is unacceptable and undermines public trust. The administration must be held responsible.
This raises some concerning questions about the boundaries between politics and government administration. Federal agencies must remain neutral and focused on serving the public, not advancing partisan interests.
Interesting development. It will be important to see how the courts rule on this case and whether the alleged actions violated laws around political activity in the federal government. Transparency and impartiality must be priorities.
Absolutely. The public deserves to know the facts, and any proven abuses of power should result in swift and appropriate consequences for those responsible.
This seems like a blatant attempt to politicize the federal bureaucracy. Altering employee email signatures to include partisan rhetoric is highly unethical and undermines the integrity of government operations.
Agreed. The administration must be held accountable for any proven attempts to co-opt civil servants for political messaging. Nonpartisanship in government is essential for public trust.
Troubling allegations that the administration is exploiting federal resources for partisan gain. Tampering with employee communications to advance a political narrative is a serious breach of ethics and the public’s trust.
Concerning to see the administration allegedly leveraging government resources for political gain. The Hatch Act is in place to prevent this type of abuse – it will be interesting to see how the courts rule on this case.
Absolutely. Nonpartisan civil servants should not be compelled to spread partisan messaging, even during a government shutdown. This sets a dangerous precedent if left unchecked.
If true, this is a clear violation of the Hatch Act and an egregious overreach of executive power. Federal agencies must remain impartial and focused on serving the public, not pushing a political agenda.