At the start of December 2025, nearly 250 U.S.-based diplomats received a jarring message: the mass layoffs first announced in July were finally set to take effect on December 5, ending months of uncertainty for hundreds of Foreign Service officers. The move, coming on the heels of a chaotic year for the State Department, prompted the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA) and the American Federation of Government Employees to file suit against the Trump administration, seeking to block the dismissals and preserve the livelihoods—and, as many diplomats see it, the very identity—of those affected.
According to Foreign Policy, the layoffs were originally delayed by a mandatory 120-day administrative leave period that ended in November, a pause that coincided with a federal government shutdown. That shutdown, in turn, triggered a congressional funding resolution to keep the government running. Crucially, lawmakers included a provision in that resolution banning large-scale firings, known in government parlance as reductions in force (RIF), through January 30, 2026. Yet, despite what seemed to many like a clear legal barrier, the administration pressed ahead with the layoffs, prompting immediate legal action from the unions representing the affected diplomats.
"It is unfortunate that unions needed to sue in the first place to stop the State Department’s actions when the continuing resolution is clear that no funds can be used to implement or carry out Reductions In Force through Jan. 30," said Senator Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who played a key role in drafting the funding language. She added, "The administration should just follow the law instead of systematically dismantling our diplomatic institutions and weakening the workforce we depend on to advance U.S. interests, respond to crises and out-compete adversaries like the People’s Republic of China."
The unions quickly won a temporary restraining order halting the layoffs, and a hearing was scheduled for December 17, where the government was expected to present its case. A State Department spokesperson told Foreign Policy via email, "The Trump administration will continue to abide by all laws, regulations, and court orders." Still, the uncertainty was palpable for the 246 diplomats facing imminent job loss.
If the judge grants the unions’ request for a preliminary injunction, it would provide only a six-week reprieve—hardly a permanent solution, but a meaningful one for those affected, especially with the holidays approaching. As Rohit Nepal, AFSA’s State Department vice president, pointed out, some of the diplomats could become eligible for retirement in that window, allowing them to retire with full pensions rather than being forced out just shy of the finish line.
"I certainly hope that the judge reads the CR [continuing resolution] the way we read it and the way that a lot of the members of Congress that have helped read it," Nepal said. "In an ideal world, the department would just simply [follow] what is pretty clear language in our minds, but obviously they didn’t."
Behind the legal wrangling, however, lies a deeper crisis within the ranks of American diplomacy. Earlier this month, AFSA released the results of its annual survey of active-duty members, and the findings were grim: 98 percent reported low morale, 61 percent said their workloads had increased due to staffing shortages, and 65 percent pointed to the politicization of their traditionally nonpartisan workplace as their top concern. An overwhelming 86 percent said changes introduced by the Trump administration had harmed their ability to advance U.S. diplomatic goals. Only 1 percent believed the administration’s changes had improved their ability to conduct foreign policy.
The numbers are more than statistics—they represent real people, many of whom have devoted their lives to public service. NPR’s Michele Kelemen profiled one such diplomat, Wren Elhai, who after 14 years of service was among those laid off in July. Elhai, a Russian and Chinese speaker who was sworn in as a Foreign Service officer on September 11, 2011, described the unique sense of loss that comes with being cut from the State Department.
"When you’re a computer programmer and you get laid off from one tech company, you’re still a computer programmer. You get to have a career. You go off to find another job. When you’re a diplomat and you get laid off from the State Department, you’re no longer a diplomat. Like, we lost our professional identities and our careers with that layoff," Elhai told NPR.
Elhai’s career had taken him from Moscow, where he helped finalize American adoptions before Vladimir Putin banned them, to Kazakhstan, where he used public diplomacy—and even Kazakh traditional songs—to counter Russian disinformation and improve perceptions of the U.S. He later worked on technology, science diplomacy, and environmental issues, only to see his office shuttered during Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s reorganization of the department in 2025, a move aimed at streamlining what Rubio called a bloated bureaucracy.
"Many of us had the expectation right up until that date that the fact that we already were in different jobs, doing different things meant that the reorganization would not affect us. But that was mistaken," Elhai said. He had been preparing for a new assignment in West Africa and was in French language training when the news came down.
While the State Department welcomed a new class of Foreign Service officers, Elhai and many of his colleagues watched their own careers abruptly end. The layoffs, which affected more than 240 Foreign Service officers and over 1,000 civil servants, followed a year of sweeping changes: the firing of more than 1,100 department civil servants, the shuttering of the U.S. Agency for International Development, a dramatic shrinking of the foreign aid budget, and the sidelining of career diplomats in favor of special appointees for ambassadorships and high-stakes special envoy positions.
For those left behind, the sense of mission endures, but so do the scars. As Elhai reflected on his years of service, he pointed out the tangible impact of diplomatic work—families in the U.S. made whole through adoptions, Americans able to do business and travel in countries once closed off, and U.S. policies advanced in difficult places. "There are kids that grew up in a loving family who wouldn’t have otherwise because of the work that we did," he said.
The fate of the diplomats now rests with the courts, but the broader questions about the future of the U.S. Foreign Service—and the value placed on career diplomats—will linger long after the legal dust settles. For now, hundreds of dedicated public servants wait, hoping for a reprieve, and wondering what will become of the institution to which they have given so much.
