Would You Keep This 750-Pound Gator as Your Pet?

President Donald Trump is asking the Supreme Court to lift lower court orders preventing him from continuing his mass firings of the civil service, reported The Associated Press on Friday.

These firings have been on hold in part due to a ruling by a federal judge in San Francisco last week.

The report noted that the lawsuit in question was brought by an array of plaintiffs, including "the cities of San Francisco, Chicago, and Baltimore; the labor group American Federation of Government Employees; and the nonprofit groups Alliance for Retired Americans, Center for Taxpayer Rights, and Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks."

EXCLUSIVE: Breastfeeding mom of US citizen sues Kristi Noem after being grabbed by ICE

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, "questioned whether Trump's Republican administration was acting lawfully in trying to pare the federal workforce," the report noted.

She "directed numerous federal agencies to stop acting on Trump's workforce executive order signed in February and a subsequent memo issued by the Department of Government Efficiency and the Office of Personnel Management," although her order will expire on its own next week.

Since taking office, Trump has sought to slash personnel at agencies across the board, much of it with the blessing of tech billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency task force.

In many cases, these firings had to be walked back simply because critical functions broke. In one of the most high-profile cases, Trump fired hundreds of vital workers at the National Nuclear Safety Administration and had to re-hire many of them.

Republican pollster Frank Luntz tried to turn down the temperature on Friday in a heated online feud being waged by former Barack Obama campaign strategist and press official Johanna Maska.

Maska took particular umbrage over Luntz's appearance on a podcast with Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), and said she "wanted to slap" him over it in a video posted to X.

"Frank Luntz, you may know, is a Republican pollster, he does these focus groups," Maska said. "He was also involved in Newt Gingrich's rise. He was involved in reforming welfare. He actually bragged on the podcast about reforming welfare. And if you remember in the '90s, that meant that moms, who have a job, by the way, job is being a mom, had to go find a job outside of the home.

"And on this same podcast today that I'm listening to, Frank Luntz had the audacity to say that it is moms who are causing the current political division because we're not turning off screens. I wanted to slap him!"

"He was involved in setting the stage for this division!" she continued. "He is part of the problem. And I am sorry, but moms not being able to control what is addictive, that we have allowed unregulated to take over our children's brains, not because of moms, but because of underregulation. You're going to say it's our fault? Frank Luntz, you caused this division!"

Luntz, a Trump-skeptical pollster who had been attempting to make a point that social media is doing deep social harm to the next generation, responded to the post.

"Johanna, you say you want to hurt me physically over a podcast comment. You even plan to track me down so you can hit me," wrote Luntz. "I assume you don't really mean it — but maybe you do? That's the problem with social media; it's often used by people like you to threaten people like me. And when children threaten each other the same way, moms and dads need to take the phone away and kick their kids off the computer."

"I agree with you: We need some regulations to keep children away from online toxicity. But parents who teach respect will be far more effective than any regulation," he added. "I'm sorry I made you so angry. But nothing I said deserves the response you gave — you actually made my point perfectly."