The U.S. State Department has embarked on a sweeping reorganization that will result in the elimination of nearly 15% of its domestic workforce, affecting around 1,800 employees, as part of an effort to align diplomatic operations with the “America First” agenda championed by President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
According to internal memos, 1,107 career civil servants and 246 domestically assigned Foreign Service officers will receive layoff notices. Civil service personnel will be offered a 60-day separation period, while Foreign Service officers may be placed on up to 120 days of administrative leave before the separations take effect. This marks the most significant downsizing of the department in recent memory and coincides with the merger of USAID into the State Department—alongside the closure or consolidation of hundreds of domestic offices and bureaus.
Marshalling the justification for the cuts, Secretary Rubio has described the restructuring as critical to removing redundant or non-core functions, and argued that several positions were already vacant or slated for retirement. He also noted that the department is seeking efficiency to budget its resources more strategically. An internal statement attributed to Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources Michael Rigas emphasized sacrifice and gratitude: “First and foremost, we want to thank them for their dedication and service to the United States”.
But opposition has been swift and vocal. The American Academy of Diplomacy denounced the reorganization as “vandalism,” warning that the cuts come at a time when global crises are intensifying. Similarly, the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), which represents Foreign Service personnel, has questioned the legality and timing of the layoffs, citing pending court injunctions. In late June, a federal judge temporarily blocked the mass firings until the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on the legality of such large-scale reductions amid ongoing litigation.
The departmental cuts extend far beyond personnel losses. According to documentation secured by Congressional sources, more than 300 offices and bureaus—including key units focused on democracy promotion, refugee aid, human rights, and immigration—will be eliminated or folded into other divisions. The plan, laid out to Congress in May, called for the closure of 132 domestic offices, consolidation of 137 more, and the removal of over 3,400 positions—some of which are being addressed through early retirements and voluntary departures.
Of particular controversy is the absorption of USAID: since February, more than 10,000 USAID employees underwent administrative leave, with nearly all but a few hundred eventually laid off. Its functions are being migrated into the State Department via a new “America First Foreign Assistance Program” . Critics caution this may cripple global development efforts and embolden anti-American sentiment abroad.
Implementation of the restructuring was originally scheduled for July 1, but was delayed by the judicial order. Internal State Department correspondence suggests that once legal clearance is secured, large-scale layoff notices could be issued almost immediately. Employees have reported conference rooms at headquarters being reserved for meetings to deliver reduction-in-force notices.
Detractors—including former diplomats and national security analysts—warn that severing experienced career staff on key desks such as Asia, Middle East, and humanitarian affairs may degrade U.S. diplomatic readiness. They argue that institutional knowledge being lost in the purge cannot easily be replaced. Proponents counter that the State Department had become bloated after decades of post-Cold War expansion, and that these steps will redirect focus back to strategic priorities .
As the legal battle continues, the fate of the department’s workforce—and by extension, the diplomatic corps—hangs in the balance. Should the Supreme Court uphold the injunction, the mass dismissals may be stalled indefinitely. However, with the court’s recent leanings in similar cases, experts expect the cuts to proceed shortly . The coming weeks will reveal not just who stays and who goes—but how far-reaching the transformation of U.S. diplomacy will be.
