logo
Court allows CIA to fire employees who worked on DEI

Court allows CIA to fire employees who worked on DEI

Yahoo27-02-2025

A federal judge has turned down a bid to block the Trump administration from firing intelligence officers who worked in DEI programs, but he prodded the spy agencies involved to try to find new jobs in the intelligence community for those being ousted.
At a hearing Thursday in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia, U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga said the laws and court precedents relating to intelligence agency employees give them little recourse in the courts if top officials decide that firing them is in the 'national interest,' even if they've worked for the government for a decade or more.
'In effect, they are at-will employees,' said Trenga, an appointee of President George W. Bush.
The employees involved in the case are 19 intelligence-agency workers whom the administration identified as working on 'diversity, equity and inclusion.' President Donald Trump has sought to end DEI initiatives throughout the federal government.
In their lawsuit contesting their firings, the workers say they had been temporarily assigned by their agencies to implement civil rights laws within the intelligence community. Their duties included advancing the hiring and promotion of underrepresented minorities. They say Congress appropriated money for the specific tasks they were carrying out.
The workers allege that the firings violate two federal laws as well as the First and Fifth Amendments.
But Trenga said CIA Director John Ratcliffe has 'uncabined discretion' to use the 'national interest' provision to strip employees of the ability to use any of the normal mechanisms to contest a firing.
'The regulations clearly state that there is no property interest in the employment they have,' the judge said. 'The ability of the director to terminate without respect to any other procedures is embedded in those regulations.'
At an earlier stage in the case, Trenga briefly halted the firings while he heard further arguments. But on Thursday, he denied the workers' request for a temporary restaining order or preliminary injunction that would have extended the earlier block.
The judge did extend until Monday the deadline for the 17 CIA employees and two Office of Director of National Intelligence employees in the case to accept the deferred resignation program the Trump administration offered to most executive branch employees.
The judge also made clear that he found it bizarre and unwise that the intelligence agencies would cashier long-serving employees who just happened to be in DEI-related roles when Trump took office.
'If fairness and good judgment were the guiding principle, it would be an easy case,' Trenga said.
During legal arguments that preceded the judge's ruling, Assistant U.S. Attorney Dennis Barghaan contended that the national interest exemption is exceedingly broad and is not limited to national security concerns. Barghaan, a career lawyer who heads the civil division in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Alexandria, also sought to put some distance between himself and the decision to ax the longtime workers.
'It's not my place here to defend the merits of the decision or the righteousness of it,' Barghaan said. 'I feel for the plaintiffs.'
Barghaan's expression of sympathy was not well-received by some of the intellgence-agency employees who filed the suit and were present at the hearing. Two of them hectored him as he left the courtroom.
'You should be ashamed. You should really be ashamed of yourself,' one man called out at Barghaan as he waited for an elevator. 'That was really disgusting.'
The government attorney did not respond.
Trenga did not rule out future relief for the intelligence-agency workers. He suggested they might have valid legal claims if they aren't considered for other roles or if the administration maligns them by publicly linking their dismissals to Trump's repeated denunciations of DEI programs as corrupt.
'The court is certainly available for future consideration of this case as the facts unfold over the next several months,' the judge said.
Trenga also said he thinks Ratcliffe could comply with the administration's anti-DEI policies and still allow the employees to transfer to other roles. And he emphasized CIA's regulations allow for an appeal, although he acknowledged that the appeal would likely go to the same officials who carried out the firings.
After the court session, the workers' lawyer, Kevin Carroll, told reporters that he hopes the CIA will reconsider and allow the workers to move into other positions in government. 'We respect the court's decision,' Carroll said. 'I would certainly hope, given the judge's remarks from the bench, that Director Ratcliffe would consider allowing the plaintiffs to reapply for other jobs.'
Carroll told plaintiffs after the session that he will consider an appeal, but that appeals courts rarely overturn a lower court's decision to deny an injunction at this stage of a case.
The plaintiffs were identified by pseudonyms in public court files. In recent submissions, they variously described themselves as female, gay, Asian American, atheist, or over 40 years of age. Carroll said many of the workers are considering their legal options to pursue discrimination claims in connection with their firing.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Israeli Ambassador: ‘Objective is not to contain the war' but ‘win the war' against Iran
Israeli Ambassador: ‘Objective is not to contain the war' but ‘win the war' against Iran

The Hill

time12 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Israeli Ambassador: ‘Objective is not to contain the war' but ‘win the war' against Iran

Israeli ambassador to the United States, Yechiel Leiter, said the goal in the war against Iran is not to contain it but to win it, as the two countries continue to exchange strikes for a third day. During an appearance on ABC's 'This Week,' host Martha Raddatz asked Leiter how Israel would avoid escalating and attempt to contain the war. 'Martha, the objective is not to contain the war,' Leiter responded. 'The objective is to win the war.' 'Eighty years ago, we had a little man with a mustache running around Europe that nobody believed him when he said he was going to destroy the Jewish people,' he continued. 'We lost 6 million. Now we've got a crazed new Hitler running around the Middle East saying he's going to destroy us. 'We have to take him at face value… He's got a concrete plan to destroy us.' Her comments come after Israel and Iran continued to exchange airstrikes on Sunday. Another round of U.S.-Iranian nuclear talks was scheduled in Muscat, Oman, but was cancelled amid the fighting. When Raddatz mentioned that Trump did not want Israel to strike Iran because it would 'blow it,' Leiter said Trump was 'congratulatory about our strike,' noting that he had been given a 'heads-up' by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. When pushed further on whether Israel would accept a deal between Iran and Israel, Leiter said not unless Iran is willing to halt the nuclear program entirely. 'He wants the nuclear program in Iran to be halted in its entirety,' Leiter said. 'He said it very clearly: dismantle the centrifuges, dismantle the infrastructure, and stop in total the enrichment of uranium. So, if that can be achieved through negotiation, so be it. We'll be very happy. But it hasn't been.'

Trump wary of increasing US involvement as Israel-Iran conflict escalates
Trump wary of increasing US involvement as Israel-Iran conflict escalates

CNN

time13 minutes ago

  • CNN

Trump wary of increasing US involvement as Israel-Iran conflict escalates

Amid ongoing waves of tit-for-tat strikes between Israel and Iran, President Donald Trump is publicly and privately making clear his desire to keep the United States out of the fray for now, wary of becoming bogged in another Middle East war and highly attuned to the changing politics of his party. Sources familiar with the matter say Israel has spoken with the US about possibly increasing its level of involvement, though one Israeli official cautioned those conversation have not yet included 'practical' discussions of the finer details. And while Trump hopes to avoid a prolonged conflict that could further destabilize the Middle East, some in the administration recognize that American military assistance may help Israel conclude its objectives more quickly, the sources said. 'We're not involved in it. It's possible we could get involved. But we are not at this moment involved,' Trump told ABC News on Sunday morning. The competing interests have created a complicated dynamic for a president eager to make good on his pledge to bring peace to the world's troubled regions. Since Israel launched its first attack early Friday morning, the US has offered defensive support to Israel intercepting an onslaught of Iranian reprisal strikes. But Trump has stopped well short of joining Israel's military in its attempts to dismantle Iran's nuclear facilities, resisting pressure from fellow Republicans to join the fight. He said in a social media post Saturday that he felt the conflict 'should end' as he continues to hold out hope for a negotiated agreement that would curb Tehran's nuclear ambitions, even after planned talks this weekend in Oman between the US and Iranian negotiating teams were called off. At stake is Trump's promise to act as a global peacemaker — or, as he told his inaugural crowd in January, to 'bring a new spirit of unity to a world that has been angry, violent and totally unpredictable.' That vow has already been tested by his inability to bring about an end to the Ukraine conflict and halting efforts to stop the fighting in Gaza. Now, as a new flashpoint is threatening to spiral out of control on Trump's watch, the commander-in-chief is attempting to limit US involvement. 'The U.S. had nothing to do with the attack on Iran, tonight,' Trump wrote on Truth Social late Saturday amid a fresh round of attacks in the region. 'If we are attacked in any way, shape or form by Iran, the full strength and might of the U.S. Armed Forces will come down on you at levels never seen before. However, we can easily get a deal done between Iran and Israel, and end this bloody conflict!!!' The post sent the message that Trump's line for getting more directly involved in Israel's assaults would be an attack on American facilities or personnel in the region. Short of that, the US role in the conflict so far has largely been defensive. The Israeli operation against Iran is expected to take 'weeks, not days' and is moving forward with implicit US approval, according to White House and Israeli officials. The Trump administration has not critiqued the weeks-long timeframe in private discussions, an Israeli official told CNN. A White House official said the administration was aware and implicitly supportive of Israel's plans. When asked about how long the conflict could continue, the official said it depended on Iran's response. 'The Trump administration firmly believes this can be solved by continuing negotiations with the US,' the official said, adding that the US was not going to direct Israel to do anything but defend itself. American military planners have long had prepared options for joint US-Israeli actions against Iranian facilities should a US president ultimately decide to try taking out Iran's nuclear facilities, some of which are buried deep underground. There is little to indicate Trump has come close to approving such options, however, and according to an Israeli official, the possibility of offensive US support for Israel's strikes inside Iran had not been discussed on a 'practical basis.' 'We are not there, on a practical basis,' the Israeli official said. 'If at some point, the United States decides to take an offensive role, I don't think we'll be in a position to try and talk them out of it – but that's not our ask,' the official said, adding that such a move would be a sovereign decision of the US. The official explained that the endgame is to make sure that Iran is 'no longer an existential threat' to Israel, with both its nuclear and ballistic missiles program. 'If it's done in conjunction with allies, fine, but if it's not done in conjunction with allies, we have to do it ourselves,' the official said. Inside the White House, there continues to be heavy skepticism about getting involved in the conflict further, according to multiple officials familiar with the matter. Trump remains concerned about getting dragged into a war he didn't start and wanted to avoid, and is acutely aware of the complicated politics at play, those officials said. Though he publicly warned Israel against launching an attack on Iran ahead of Friday's strikes, he said afterward he was supportive of the effort and well aware that it was being planned. Prev Next Trump has long promised not to engage in 'nation building' adventurism overseas, decrying his predecessors for sending American troops to die in wars that generated little benefit back home. 'For at least two decades, political leaders from both parties have dragged our military into missions it was never meant to be' a part of, said Trump told graduating cadets at West Point last month. 'They sent our warriors on nation-building crusades to nations that wanted nothing to do with us, led by leaders that didn't have a clue in distant lands,' he said, vowing to never repeat the mistake. Now, however, he is under pressure from some of his Republican allies to take a more interventionist role. 'If diplomacy fails, going all in for Israel shows that America is back as a reliable ally and a strong force against oppression. It would strengthen our hand in all corners of the world, as well as all other conflicts we face,' Sen. Lindsey Graham wrote on X last week.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store