Forced leaves began on Friday, resulting in the majority of employees from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) being removed from their positions globally. In response to the sudden actions taken by the new Trump administration to dismantle the venerable agency and its global programs, employee organizations have turned to the federal judiciary for intervention.
A federal court hearing was held on Friday regarding a lawsuit filed by employees who are seeking to halt the agency’s closure temporarily. Meanwhile, to signal the changes, duct tape was used to obscure the USAID name on various signs outside its Washington, D.C. headquarters.
Officials from the State Department and other agencies have been urging the Trump administration to allow more personnel from USAID to maintain their positions at least temporarily. They argued this is crucial for managing the logistics of returning thousands of USAID direct hires, contractors, and their families back to the United States from overseas.
Recently, the administration communicated to USAID leadership that it intended to exclude fewer than 300 staff members from the global leave imposed on approximately 8,000 direct hires and contractors. Officials at U.S. embassies are additionally seeking exemptions to allow employees and their families some leeway, particularly for those who must remove their children from schools in the middle of the academic year.
Information from two current employees and a former senior official revealed details about the staffing reduction strategy shared with senior USAID officials. They chose to remain unnamed due to an order from the Trump administration that prohibits USAID employees from discussing matters outside the agency.
Only a limited number of remaining direct hires and contractors, along with around 5,000 locally hired employees positioned abroad, would be responsible for overseeing a few essential programs that the administration intends to continue for the time being. It remains uncertain if the staffing reductions are permanent or merely temporary, which could allow more personnel to return once the administration completes its evaluation of aid and development initiatives it wishes to revive.
This week, nearly all USAID staff stationed overseas were given a 30-day window, starting Friday, to make arrangements to return to the U.S., with the government covering travel and relocation expenses. According to a notice posted late Thursday on the USAID website, those on administrative leave while overseas would not be mandated to leave their host countries; however, employees who decided to remain longer than the 30 days may have to bear their own costs unless they receive a hardship waiver.
During a recent visit to the Dominican Republic, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the government would assist employees wishing to return home within the specified 30 days and would consider unique circumstances as needed. “We’re not aiming to disrupt people’s personal lives,” he reassured the press, denying any intent of being punitive.
Rubio contended that these actions were compelled by the need for collaboration since agency staff were purportedly attempting to bypass a halt on foreign assistance payments. However, USAID personnel have refuted these obstruction allegations.
On social media, President Trump expressed his stance by tweeting, “CLOSE IT DOWN.” Rubio later remarked that while the U.S. government would persist in providing foreign aid, such assistance would need to align with U.S. national interests.
The Trump administration, alongside key supporter Elon Musk, who is spearheading efforts for budget reductions, has placed USAID under significant scrutiny as part of a larger initiative aimed at restructuring the federal government and its programs.
Since the inauguration, the agency has faced a wide-ranging funding freeze, causing most of its global operations to come to a standstill, with nearly all employees placed on leave or furloughed. Musk and the president have discussed eliminating USAID as a standalone agency and incorporating its remaining functions into the State Department.
Critics, including Democratic lawmakers, have labeled this strategy as illegal, lacking necessary congressional consent. This argument has been echoed in a lawsuit filed by the American Foreign Service Association and the American Federation of Government Employees. The complaint urges the federal court in Washington to compel the reopening of USAID’s facilities, the reinstatement of its personnel, and the resumption of funding. According to the lawsuit, government officials “failed to recognize the catastrophic implications of their actions” both for U.S. workers and for global humanitarian needs.
