In Washington, employees of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) appealed to a federal judge on Thursday, seeking to maintain a block against the Trump administration’s initiative to reduce its workforce significantly. U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, who was appointed by Trump, previously dealt the administration and entrepreneur Elon Musk a loss last week by temporarily stopping plans that would have resulted in thousands of employees being placed on leave. Concurrently, workers stationed overseas would only have had 30 days to return to the United States at the expense of the government.
Nichols’ temporary order was scheduled to lapse by the end of the day, prompting two associations representing federal employees to request its extension, as well as a suspension of Trump’s freeze on nearly all foreign aid. The president’s pause in funding has reportedly disrupted medical clinics, emergency water supplies, and the majority of the numerous U.S.-funded assistance and development initiatives globally, according to humanitarian organizations and USAID staff.
During the court proceedings, Judge Nichols questioned the legal representatives for the USAID unions, focusing on how halting funding for the agency’s operations was negatively impacting the workers. His inquiries centered on the issue of legal standing, which pertains to whether the unions can demonstrate legitimate legal harm warranting the continued blockage against the Trump administration’s strategy.
Legal standing is a critical issue in the judicial process, as highlighted by a different judge previously ruling in favor of the Trump administration when it came to allowing Musk-supported workforce reductions via voluntary resignations, commonly referred to as buyouts. Although the administration and the Musk-backed initiative, known as the Department of Government Efficiency, have targeted multiple agencies, their most aggressive measures appear directed towards USAID, with unsubstantiated claims that its functions are wasteful and misaligned with Trump’s agenda.
In recent court documents, Pete Marocco, the deputy head of USAID, claimed that “insubordination” among staff was hindering the new administration’s ability to conduct a thorough review of aid programs, necessitating the dismissal of nearly all USAID personnel. However, he did not provide any substantiating evidence to back this claim.
USAID employees have refuted allegations of insubordination in their court submissions. They stated that they were striving to interpret and adhere to what they characterized as ambiguous and perplexing directives, some of which allegedly originated from Musk’s associates and other external parties.
Supporters of the agency have informed Democratic senators that this shutdown, along with other measures, such as canceling USAID’s lease on its Washington, D.C. headquarters, could ultimately be aimed at dismantling USAID before legislative bodies or the courts can intervene. Employee groups, some Democratic lawmakers, and various advocates contend that Trump does not possess the authority to eliminate USAID or terminate its operations without congressional consent. Conversely, the administration asserts that the influence of the courts or the legislature in this matter is limited.
Government attorneys noted in court filings that “The President’s powers in the realm of foreign affairs are generally vast and unreviewable,” highlighting the complexities surrounding the administration’s actions and the current legal proceedings.
