President Donald Trump has revived and expanded a controversial policy that could see the dismissal of up to 50,000 federal employees, targeting civil servants deemed insufficiently loyal or obstructive to his administration’s agenda. The policy centers on the reimplementation of Schedule F, a job classification created by Trump in 2020, rescinded by President Biden in 2021, and now reinstated by executive order as part of a broader attempt to reshape the federal workforce.

Schedule F reclassifies civil service workers in policy-related roles as “at-will” employees, stripping them of traditional job protections and due process rights. This makes it far easier for political appointees to terminate federal workers without cause or warning. The Trump administration claims the reform is necessary to enhance efficiency and ensure federal workers are aligned with the administration’s priorities. Critics, however, warn it amounts to a political purge that undermines the foundational principles of an impartial civil service.

According to estimates from the Office of Personnel Management, around 50,000 employees may fall under the new classification, including staff at the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Justice, Department of Education, and other agencies involved in regulatory, legal, and social policy. Already, more than 60,000 workers have been laid off or forced to resign since the policy’s announcement in January 2025.

The Schedule F initiative is a key element of Project 2025, a blueprint developed by conservative think tanks and former Trump officials that outlines a vision of government more tightly controlled by the executive branch. Alongside staffing changes, the Trump administration has shuttered several independent agencies, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and USAID, consolidating their functions under departments more directly controlled by the White House.

Unions and civil liberties organizations have condemned the move. Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, called it an attempt to “politicize the professional civil service and punish dissent.” Legal challenges are underway in multiple federal courts, with unions arguing that the mass reclassification violates the separation of powers and threatens the integrity of government decision-making.

Internal documents reviewed by several news outlets suggest that the White House has created loyalty scorecards for senior federal employees, tracking public statements, social media activity, and internal memos to determine alignment with administration policies. Employees deemed disloyal or “problematic” are being prioritized for reassignment or dismissal.

The chilling effect has already begun to ripple through the bureaucracy. Agency heads report rising self-censorship among staff, a breakdown in policy deliberations, and widespread resignations of experienced personnel. Many employees fear retaliation for raising legal or ethical objections to proposed actions, especially in areas involving immigration, environmental deregulation, and reproductive health policy.

International observers have raised alarms. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers issued a statement warning that the reclassification of career civil servants into at-will employees contradicts international norms on good governance and democratic accountability. The European Union issued a similar notice, urging the U.S. to reconsider policies that erode the impartiality of its institutions.

For many civil servants, the stakes are personal. Employees who have dedicated decades to public service are now being removed from their posts, escorted from buildings, and barred from entering agency facilities. Several whistleblowers who previously exposed misconduct under earlier Trump terms have already been terminated.

Despite the growing backlash, the administration is pushing ahead, claiming that Schedule F is essential to rooting out what Trump has repeatedly referred to as the “deep state.” As legal challenges move through the courts, and Congress debates its limited options, thousands of public workers remain in limbo, uncertain whether their commitment to service will soon cost them their livelihoods.