Judge dismisses lawsuits challenging Trump’s USAID dismantling

A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has dismissed two lawsuits that tried to block the Trump administration’s dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development. It’s another major legal victory for the White House, with Judge Carl Nichols ruling that the court lacked jurisdiction over the claims, which were brought by organizations representing USAID employees and contractors. “Each of the employee organizations seeks relief from quintessentially personnel-related injuries that … must be redressed through various administrative review schemes that Congress has specified by statute,” Nichols — an appointee of President Donald Trump — wrote in an opinion published on Friday. Before Trump returned to office, USAID — which was once the world’s largest foreign assistance donor — employed over 10,000 staff across the world. But within weeks of his arrival, most of those employees were severed from the agency, with contractors being terminated and direct hires being placed on administrative leave. On Feb. 6, several employee organizations — including the American Foreign Service Association, the American Federation of Government Employees, and the Personal Services Contractor Association — sued the Trump administration. Each of those groups had argued that the administration’s push to tear apart USAID ran afoul of the Constitution, legal limits on executive authority, and the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how federal agencies develop and implement regulations. The lawsuits stated that the administration overstepped by freezing aid programs, putting thousands of staff and contractors on leave, and attempting to fold USAID into the State Department. “These [Trump administration’s] actions have generated a global humanitarian crisis by abruptly halting the crucial work of USAID employees, grantees, and contractors,” the American Foreign Service Association and American Federation of Government Employees wrote in their initial complaint. “They have cost thousands of American jobs. And they have imperiled U.S. national security interests.” At first, the lawsuits stalled the firings, pausing the government’s order to place direct hires on administrative leave. But that was only a temporary reprieve: by the end of February, Nichols cleared the way for thousands of staff to be put on administrative leave, and the majority were officially severed from the agency by July 1. The latest opinion solidifies those firings, with Nichols stating that employee-related claims should be channeled through different systems, and that one of the plaintiffs — Oxfam America — lacked the standing to sue. Nichols also said the plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate irreparable harm, and there were no declarations from terminated employees stating that they were “unable to find new work.” “Without that kind of concrete evidence, it is wholly speculative whether the complete professional lockout that the PSCA presages could eventually befall its members,” Nichols wrote, using the acronym for the Personal Services Contractor Association. Over the last six months, the Trump administration has canceled nearly 85% of USAID’s programs, ending contracts, awards, and grants, and sending shockwaves across the aid sector. By May 30, nearly 20,000 U.S. jobs related to USAID’s dissolution are estimated to have been lost, according to USAID Stop-Work, an advocacy group that was created in the wake of the cuts. And on July 1, just 300 USAID staffers were transferred from that agency to the State Department, which has since taken over the little left of USAID. “The actions of this administration will haunt our country far longer than any of us can foresee,” wrote the American Foreign Service Association in a press release on July 1, three weeks before Nichols’ opinion. “The trust of allies and communities will take decades to rebuild—if it can ever be restored. This is not simply a policy failure; it is an open wound in American diplomacy that may never heal..” In a statement published on their X account on Friday, AFSA said it was reviewing the ruling with its legal team, and “exploring every option to appeal.”