A federal judge has temporarily blocked the CIA from firing 11 officers placed on leave over their roles in DEIA programs.
A federal judge has temporarily halted the firings of 11 CIA officers who were placed on paid administrative leave due to their roles in the agency’s diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) programs.
U.S. District Court Judge Anthony Trenga issued a five-day administrative stay on Feb. 18, preventing the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) from firing or placing the plaintiffs on unpaid leave while the court considers their request for a temporary restraining order (TRO).
“Defendants shall refrain from terminating Plaintiff John Does 1-6 and Jane Does 1-5 or placing these Plaintiffs on leave without pay, such that these Plaintiffs shall continue to be on administrative leave with their full pay and benefits,” Trenga wrote in his order.
The judge scheduled a Feb. 24 hearing to determine whether to grant a temporary injunction that would prevent the officers from being fired.
The plaintiffs, all career intelligence officers, argued in court filings that their temporary DEIA assignments, which were directed by senior supervisors at ODNI and the CIA, were used as justification for politically motivated firings.
They point to President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order, titled “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing,” which declared existing DEIA programs “illegal and immoral” but did not explicitly mandate firing employees assigned to them.
Despite the absence of a direct termination order, the plaintiffs were placed on administrative leave on Jan. 22, allegedly solely due to their temporary DEIA assignments and not for poor performance or other substantive factors. They were later ordered to report to CIA and ODNI facilities with their intelligence community (IC) access badges—a move they claim signaled imminent termination.
“In my experience, when a CIA officer is told to report to the visitors’ center of an Agency facility with their IC badge, it presages negative employment action against the officer, including but not limited to termination or being placed on involuntary leave without pay,” John Doe 1 stated in his declaration.
John Doe 1, a 15-year CIA officer, had been temporarily assigned to a DEIA role focused on hiring, retention, and advancement of employees from federally protected classes. In court filings, he defended the national security value of DEI, arguing that a diverse workforce enhances intelligence-gathering operations by allowing officers to blend into foreign populations, conduct culturally sensitive operations, and engage sources in restrictive societies.
The plaintiffs claim their expected termination violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment. They argue that their firing would be arbitrary and capricious, lacks any factual justification, and denies them due process.
“These people are being fired just because of an assumption that’s been made that they are leftists,” the plaintiffs’ lawyer, Kevin Carroll, himself a former CIA undercover officer, told Reuters.
Carroll revealed that the plaintiffs are part of a larger group of 51 CIA officers who were placed on paid administrative leave on Jan. 22 following the executive order. According to him, the officers were summoned to a visitor center outside CIA headquarters, where their identification badges were confiscated.
They were then given three options with a 5 p.m. deadline: retire by Oct. 1, resign immediately, or be terminated on May 20, according to Carroll, who said that officers who refused to choose one of these options would be automatically fired.
The CIA has not yet commented on the case and the agency’s justification for the expected terminations remains unclear. The government has yet to file a formal opposition to the plaintiffs’ TRO request but attorneys said during the Feb. 18 court hearing that they intend to do so.
The Epoch Times has reached out to the CIA with a request for comment.
Trump’s executive order that plays a central role in this case calls on all agencies to “terminate, to the maximum extent allowed by law, all DEI, DEIA, and ‘environmental justice’ offices and positions.” It aligns with Trump’s campaign pledge to eliminate factors like race and sex in HR decisions in favor of merit-based selection processes.