The Trump administration denies allegations that it is destroying classified employee documents at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), stating in a court filing that the claims have been misrepresented. Labor groups suing the administration argue that these documents contain personnel information essential for rehiring unlawfully terminated federal workers. However, USAID officials assert that they have merely sorted and removed copies of documents to accommodate a new tenant following an agency restructuring.
According to the Department of Justice, the documents in question were copies of records retained by other agencies or derivatively classified materials, not originals. Officials maintain that all essential records, including those related to classified programs and personnel files, remain intact. Furthermore, USAID has pledged not to destroy additional documents after March 11 without first notifying the plaintiffs and allowing them to raise concerns in court.
The lawsuit, filed by government employee unions, accuses the administration of exceeding presidential authority and violating the separation of powers by taking actions beyond what is constitutionally allowed. The legal battle began when a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order barring the government from placing USAID employees on administrative leave or expediting their removal from overseas assignments. The court later dissolved the order and denied a preliminary injunction, leaving the dispute unresolved.
Concerns over the alleged document destruction emerged after an internal email from a USAID official instructed personnel to prioritize shredding documents and use burn bags only when shredders were unavailable. The Justice Department argues that the message was taken out of context and does not indicate any illegal activity. They further contend that USAID is complying with federal records management laws, emphasizing that destroyed documents had either met retention requirements or were not considered permanent records.
Restricting USAID from managing its documents according to legal procedures would interfere with the government’s ability to oversee its records, including those classified for security purposes. The administration insists that maintaining control over record-keeping is in the public interest.
This case is part of a broader legal challenge against the administration’s freeze on foreign aid funding. Several organizations that entered contracts or received grants from USAID and the State Department have sued, arguing that the funding suspension exceeds presidential authority and violates congressional intent. The decision to withhold aid has been criticized as arbitrary and harmful, with claims that it will result in severe humanitarian consequences, including starvation and death.
A federal judge recently ruled against the administration’s aid freeze, ordering the government to release nearly $2 billion in foreign assistance funds that had already been approved by Congress. The court determined that withholding the funds constituted an unconstitutional impoundment of resources, reinforcing the principle that presidential actions must align with legislative authority.
