The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals will soon hand down a ruling on whether the U.S. government acted illegally in firing about twenty four thousand federal probationary employees without notifying the states.

Maryland, and 18 other states, are suing the White House for damages because the Trump administration did not properly warn them of mass layoffs as required by law. The states want the federal government to reinstate those employees.

“When we're talking about lack of notice, we're talking about two things. We're talking about information and time,” Caroline Van Zile, solicitor general for the District of Columbia, told the court Tuesday. “What the reinstatement does for us is it gives us that time back. It gives us the 60 days back so that we can implement our rapid response protocols if the federal government does, in fact decide to re-terminate these probationary employees.”

The law requires the notification 60 days prior.

The White House is arguing that it did not need to issue the notification because it did not conduct an official reduction in force (RIF). RIFs, which require notification, must meet very specific standards about who is laid of in certain geographic areas.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay in favor of the Trump administration, vacating the U.S. District Court’s ruling to reinstate more than 24,000 probationary federal workers last month.

Previously, U.S. District Court of Maryland Judge James Bredar issued a temporary restraining order halting the firings and ordering reinstatement. Bredar later ruled for the states in a preliminary injunction.

However, the Appeals Court felt Bredar overstepped his bounds.

“The government is likely to succeed in showing the district court lacked jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claims, and the government is unlikely to recover the funds disbursed to reinstated probationary employees,” two of the three judges wrote. One of the judges on the panel dissented with the decision.