Of the nearly two hundred active cases challenging Donald Trump's administration, there is one that "may break through in a way few others have," according to a former federal prosecutor.

Late on Wednesday, ex-prosecutor and current legal analyst Joyce Vance weighed in via a piece on Substack called, "A Court Tells Trump No (Again), While SecDef Clamps Down on the First Amendment." She highlighted one specific case, but it's worth noting that there are currently 190 active cases against the Trump admin, according to Lawfare.

Vance noted that the particular case is American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) v. United States, saying in her Substack piece, "Today, a federal judge granted a motion for a temporary restraining order, enjoining the government from firing employees during the shutdown."

Vance went on to say that "the opinion starts off with a bang. But it’s just the basic facts of the case," before quoting the judge as writing, “On October 10, 2025, federal agencies began laying off thousands of employees in the midst of a government shutdown … This is unprecedented in our country’s history. The President has publicly stated that the layoffs will be ‘a lot’ and that they ‘will be Democrat oriented, because we figure, you know, they started this thing, so they should be Democrat-oriented.’”

"To make matters worse," Vance explained, some government officials don't even know they've been laid off because they are not permitted to check their government email, where the notices were sent, during the shutdown.

Vance goes on:

"Judge Susan Illston in the Northern District of California is all business in this seven-page opinion, writing, 'It is also far from normal for an administration to fire line-level civilian employees during a government shutdown as a way to punish the opposing political party.' Words like unprecedented leap to mind, but their overuse during this administration has numbed us to them. Outrageous, undemocratic, and immoral also come to mind. The president, who is supposed to represent all Americans—to 'take care' to uphold the Constitution and our laws—isn’t."

After noting that the "facts in this case make it relatively easy for the Judge to find that the plaintiffs have met their burden for getting the temporary injunction," she says the "next step in the case will be for the Judge to decide whether to extend the injunction beyond the next two weeks. She has ordered both sides to submit their briefs on a quick schedule that concludes on October 27. She will hold a hearing on October 28 at 10:30 a.m."

"It’s possible this case may break through in a way few others have. And as the shutdown continues, the burden on all federal employees, regardless of party, will grow. Today, Justice Department employees received light paychecks—the pay period ended on October 4, but they were paid through September 30, the date of the shutdown, receiving about 70% of their expected paycheck. But the next pay period, which runs from October 5 to October 18, with checks due to employees the last week of the month, will be entirely in the shutdown period," according to the attorney. "In other words, the check will not be in the mail. Similar schedules apply to employees across the federal government. With the House still not scheduled to come back into session, there is no end in sight."

Read the essay here.