Federal Judge Halts Dismissal Of Employees Working On DEI From Intel Agencies

A federal judge temporarily halted multiple intelligence agencies from firing employees engaging in diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts, documents show.

The order, filed Tuesday, specifically blocks the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from terminating 11 anonymous federal workers from their DEI roles in the federal government.

U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, issued an administrative stay.

The plaintiffs are described as “nonpartisan civil servants serving in a vital national security role as highly-trained U.S. intelligence officers,” according to the suit, saying that they were on temporary assignment to implement federal civil rights laws.

“None of these officer’s activities was or is illegal, and at no time have the agencies employing Plaintiffs contended that they individually engaged in any misconduct, nor are they accused of poor performance,” the lawsuit reads.

President Donald Trump issued an executive order on his first day in office, Jan. 20, aimed at dismantling federal initiatives related to DEI. Federal agencies immediately began rolling back on DEI initiatives, including those in the intelligence community (IC). (RELATED: Trump Had A Busy First 12 Hours In Office — Here Were His First Big Moves)

The officials were placed on administrative leave on Jan. 22, according to the lawsuit. “On February 14, 2025 some Plaintiffs received telephone calls from human resources officers ordering them to report to the visitors’ centers of ODNI or CIA offices with their IC badges, but without counsel, as early as 8:00am on Tuesday, February 18,” the document reads.

The lawsuit accuses Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe of violating the Administrative Leave Act, alleging that they put the plaintiffs on administrative leave for over ten workdays while not issuing specific allegations against them individually.

“Officers’ basic rights include notice, the development of a record, to consult with counsel, and the opportunities to be heard and to appeal. Plaintiffs have received none of these rights,” the suit claims, arguing that the employees were wrongfully terminated because the agencies did not follow the law.

The suit claims the firings are arbitrary and a result of the officials “assumed beliefs about a domestic political issue.”

Trenga issued a brief in his ruling requesting “clarification as to what Agency regulations are implicated in this case and the potential irreparable harm to Plaintiff John Does 1-6 and Jane Does 1-5.”

“They say this is to comply with the executive order, which is really dumb because the executive order talks about ending DEI functions. It doesn’t say you have to fire DEI personnel. And nobody is hired into the CIA to be a DEI guy. It’s a rotational duty, like you have in the Army or anywhere else,” Kevin Carroll, the plaintiffs’ attorney, said in a statement to Politico. “So, they can simply just reassign these people back to being an analyst or scientist or case officer, whatever they did before instead of firing them. It’s arbitrary and capricious.”

One political and legal issue surrounding the case is the executive’s ability to dismiss intelligence agency employees without redress through the courts, the outlet reported. Multiple plaintiffs allegedly received notices saying they were let go under the CIA director’s authority to fire any person he decides it’s no longer in the interest of the U.S. to employ.

Carroll claims this reasoning can only be cited for national security reasons.

“The paperwork from the CIA is relying solely on this subsection of the National Security Act, which says the director can do whatever he wants, which the Supreme Court has made clear applies only to national security,” he said.

Trenga scheduled a continuing hearing on the case for Feb. 24.