USAID workforce placed on administrative leave; TRO issued, then dissolved

On the evening of 4 February 2025 USAID posted a notice on its website that, effective at 11:59 p.m. eastern standard time on Friday, 7 February 2025, all USAID direct-hire personnel worldwide would be placed on administrative leave, with exceptions for designated personnel performing mission-critical functions, core leadership and specifically excluded programmes.¹ The notice provided that USAID would arrange and pay return travel to the United States within 30 days for personnel posted overseas, with case-by-case extensions for hardship or safety, and identified approximately 611 employees as initial designated “excepted” personnel — those performing work for the protection of life or property under 31 U.S.C. § 1342, the Antideficiency Act’s safety-of-human-life exception — retained on duty during the placement window.² The action implemented the 90-day foreign-aid review directed by Executive Order 14169, “Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid,” signed 20 January 2025.³ On 6 February 2025 the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA) and the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) filed American Foreign Service Association et al. v. Trump, No. 1:25-cv-00352 (D.D.C.), invoking USAID’s statutory independence under § 1413 of the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, 22 U.S.C. § 6563, and personnel protections under the Foreign Service Act of 1980, 22 U.S.C. § 3901 et seq.⁴⁵⁶ On 7 February 2025 Judge Carl J. Nichols issued a temporary restraining order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b), reinstating affected employees and prohibiting further placements until 14 February; the order was subsequently extended.⁷ On 21 February 2025 Judge Nichols dissolved the TRO and denied a preliminary injunction in a 26-page opinion, finding the union plaintiffs had not shown irreparable harm because the alleged harms were primarily financial.⁸

1. Section 5 U.S.C. § 6329a caps agency-imposed administrative leave at 10 workdays per calendar year and routes longer paid non-duty status through investigative leave (§ 6329b) or notice leave (§ 6329c), with implementing regulations at 5 C.F.R. Part 630, Subpart N.⁹ The notice’s open-ended duration is in tension with the § 6329a cap; the administration has not publicly cited an alternative statutory authority.

2. Programme operations halt at posts where local staff cannot continue without direct-hire authority. Only a warranted contracting officer may bind the United States to contractual obligations under 48 C.F.R. § 1.602-1(a); recording of obligations is governed by 31 U.S.C. § 1501, and the Antideficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1341(a)(1)(B), bars obligations in excess of appropriations or apportionments.¹⁰¹¹

3. Implementing partners — multilateral organisations, NGOs and contractors — bear the operational cost of the suspension under 2 C.F.R. Part 200.¹² USAID’s worldwide workforce was approximately 10,000, of whom roughly 4,700 were direct hires subject to the notice; the TRO covered the approximately 2,200 employees targeted by the 7 February action not already on leave.¹³