DOGE-Inspired Layoffs Hit Off-Site Locations

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has begun a wave of layoffs targeting probationary officers hired within the last two years, according to reports.

Newly hired officers have been summoned to off-site locations, terminated, and required to surrender their agency credentials, three individuals familiar with the matter told The New York Times.

BREAKING: CIA begins DOGE-inspired purge of employees

“CIA officers hired within the last two years are being summoned to off-site locations, fired and forced to surrender their badges to security personnel”

— ALX (@alx) March 6, 2025

Elon Musk Called This Financial News ‘Terrifying’

The job cuts come as part of broader efforts by President Donald Trump’s administration to streamline federal agencies.

Trump previously stated that government agencies would begin conducting internal reviews to initiate workforce reductions, following the actions of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in the first month of his second term. CIA Director John Ratcliffe acted swiftly to implement these directives.

The total number of officers affected remains unclear, and it is not yet known how many more will face termination.

However, individuals familiar with the process have indicated that not all recent hires and probationary employees will be dismissed.

The layoffs follow a court ruling by Judge Anthony J. Trenga of the Eastern District of Virginia, who sided with the administration in a lawsuit brought by CIA officers assigned to diversity and recruiting efforts under the previous administration.

The lawsuit stemmed from President Trump’s executive order eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives across all federal agencies.

Following this ruling, Director Ratcliffe was granted broad authority to remove CIA officers at his discretion, without the need for an appeals process.

Judge Trenga rejected the argument that the terminations violated employees’ rights under the 14th Amendment’s due process protections or their free speech rights under the First Amendment.

Following the ruling, the CIA’s general counsel reviewed and approved Ratcliffe’s implementation of the layoffs.

Kevin Carroll, an attorney representing dismissed CIA officers, noted that the judge had strongly advised Director Ratcliffe to allow terminated employees to appeal their dismissals.

“Literally millions of dollars has been put into some of these probationary employees,” Carroll said, highlighting the extensive training costs associated with CIA recruitment.

Reports indicate that employees selected for termination were ordered to report to locations outside of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where they were formally dismissed and instructed to turn in their agency-issued credentials.

A CIA spokesperson confirmed that the agency had dismissed officers hired within the past two years but did not provide an exact number.

Some younger CIA officers are reportedly avoiding answering their phones out of concern that they will be summoned for termination, sources told The New York Times.

The layoffs have primarily affected recent hires, as these employees are still within their probationary period and subject to performance reviews.

While some officials have argued that the dismissals are based on job performance, others suggest that reductions are being carried out with a specific focus.

Certain high-priority areas, such as intelligence gathering on China and Mexican drug cartels, have seen fewer layoffs, according to agency insiders.

Former officials warn that the dismissal of recently recruited officers could create intelligence gaps, as the first two years of a CIA officer’s career typically involve intensive training in critical areas such as tradecraft, foreign languages, and specialized operational skills.

As the Trump administration continues efforts to reshape federal agencies, the CIA workforce reductions mark a significant shift in personnel management within the intelligence community.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.