Federal workers are scrambling to make sense of the flurry of decrees issued Monday evening by President Donald Trump, parsing through emails from interim agency heads and skimming reports of lawsuits filed by unions to try to understand whether they have to report to work in person, or if they will soon have a job at all.

The executive orders and memos strip employment protections from tens of thousands of federal workers, institute a hiring freeze, instruct agency leaders to send the White House a list of employees under probation, and give all federal agencies 60 days to shutter offices and positions related to diversity, equity and inclusion practices. An executive action appears to ban remote work — when an employee’s official workplace is at their home or rented space far from an agency headquarters or regional office — with some exemptions.

The return-to-office executive order mystified employees and their supervisors, who are trying to parse whether it also affects telework, which is when employees who are based in an office work from home. On Monday night, Google searches for “federal workers return to office” spiked by more than 600 percent — with the most interest in the D.C. region, where 15 percent of federal workers are based.

One longtime federal worker who has a disability accommodation that allows her to work from home said she had no idea if the in-office requirement applies to her. She cited a letter from top agency leaders that said they would consider “exemptions when deemed necessary.”

“I’m assuming that hopefully means me,” she said.

The orders were the first indication that Trump and his administration intend to make good on campaign promises to overhaul the 2.3-million-person federal workforce, which the president has painted as indolent and bloated. Trump’s budget chief nominee, hard-charging conservative Russell Vought, is scheduled to appear Wednesday before the Senate Budget Committee. Vought, who also led the White House Office of Management and Budget during Trump’s first administration, wrote a chapter of Project 2025, the conservative blueprint for a second Trump term, arguing that the next president more aggressively wield his power.

The White House, meanwhile, said in one order that the changes are necessary because of “numerous and well-documented cases of career federal employees resisting and undermining the policies and directives of their executive leadership.”

For some, the orders are triggering panic and fear, as federal workers, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of concern of professional retaliation from the Trump administration, see their careers and local economies on the chopping block.

The National Treasury Employees Union, which represents federal government employees in 37 agencies and departments, sued Trump late Monday over his order that makes it easier to fire career civil servants and replace them with political loyalists. A public interest law firm filed a separate lawsuit within minutes of Trump’s inauguration claiming billionaire Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency” violates federal transparency rules.

Local and federal officials who represent tens of thousands of federal workers vowed Tuesday to fight the decrees — though they, too, are still figuring out what exactly the orders mean.

“We are reading through the fine print to determine exactly what the game plan of the Trump administration is and the timing of different changes,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., who said he would use his position on the Appropriations Committee to “protect the integrity of the civil service.”

Jason Gray, acting administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is tasked with administering foreign aid and development assistance, wrote to his employees on Tuesday saying he had been working with leadership to “develop directives on these Executive Orders to be implemented at all levels,” according to an email obtained by The Washington Post.

He provided links to Trump’s executive orders and wrote, “Change begins now.”

Lawmakers and researchers say there are legal obstacles to swift implementation. Trump’s order stripping employment protections from many career federal workers, which the White House said is necessary to rein in what Trump and his allies have called a “deep state” of bureaucrats, is likely to be stalled by a Biden administration regulation. The return-to-office mandate, meanwhile, left room for department and agency heads to make exemptions.

“I am going to insist these measures not take place unless President Trump jumps through all the hoops, and goes through all the hoops in the right order,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who represents about 140,000 federal workers.

Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., who has for years introduced bills to protect the civil service, blamed the Biden administration for failing to push through legislation to permanently block Trump from creating job categories that convert career positions to political ones, like Trump originally tried to do at the end of his first term.

“Now we are paying a price for what I think is poor judgment in the previous administration in this one realm,” he said.

While Trump’s intentions to further politicize the federal workforce only increased the partisan divide, some Democrats have previously expressed support for the new administration’s plan to increase in-person work.

Across the D.C. region, the pandemic and proliferation of remote work have wreaked havoc on commercial corridors — proving especially devastating in Washington, where around a quarter of the workforce consists of federal government employees and office vacancies have threatened the city’s long-term financial health.

Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) for several years implored the Biden administration to direct federal workers back to offices downtown or else transfer underutilized properties to the city for more productive use, such as retail or housing. The administration issued guidance in 2023 that instructed federal agencies to assess policies around remote work, but stopped short of a mandate.

Bowser, who because of the District’s status oversees a city particularly vulnerable to federal intervention, sat down with Trump at Mar-a-Lago last month in what she called “a great meeting.” She said they discussed “areas for collaboration,” which included changes to the federal workforce.

She issued a statement Monday night expressing support for the return-to-office mandate. “Today, I am optimistic that by focusing on our shared priorities with President Trump — whether it is keeping D.C. safe and clean or bringing workers back to our Downtown — we will continue to deliver for D.C. and the American public,” she said.

Still, Trump’s anti-remote work proposal is likely to rankle some federal workers in the D.C. region with teleworking arrangements. A 2023 Washington Post-Schar School poll found a large majority of people in the D.C. region with jobs that can be done remotely said they would prefer to mostly work from home if offered a choice.

Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees — the largest federal employee union — said in a statement that Trump’s directive to ban remote work would make it harder for federal agencies to compete for top talent.

“Rather than undoing decades of progress in workplace policies that have benefited both employees and their employers, I encourage the Trump administration to rethink its approach and focus on what it can do to make government programs work better for the American people,” Kelley said in a statement.

And some local officials have made clear that they do not want to see Trump move federal agencies outside of the D.C. region, as he has promised to do, warning the move would devastate local economies and degrade the quality of government services.

“This discussion about trying to transfer operations to other parts of the country, that could also have a very harmful impact on the quality of services delivered to the American people,” Van Hollen said.

Even with the uncertainty, government workers say they are bracing for changes.

One teleworking employee at the Federal Emergency Management Agency said they were “shell-shocked” in a Tuesday meeting when the agency ordered workers back into the office by Feb. 21 — an apparent directive from the Department of Homeland Security.

“My department in FEMA doesn’t have enough seats for everyone - we were already teleworking two days a week before covid,” said the employee who is based in Silver Spring, Maryland. That is in part because the agency’s D.C. office lacks space for everyone, an issue that she says becomes apparent when the agency hosts all-hands meetings.

On those days, she said, some workers are forced to work from the break room or a classroom just to find a seat.

The shift to full in-person work will be inconvenient for many employees, the FEMA worker said, requiring them to spend more time and money commuting while upsetting routines. Workers at the agency who were previously approved to be fully remote were told Tuesday they will need to report in person if they live within 50 miles of one of FEMA’s 10 regional offices.

“This is going to require some massive soul searching,” she said. “There is a feeling this is designed to push people out of federal service.” Lisa Rein contributed to this report.