Court says that USAID must be reinstated

[Anonymous]

What case is this? I thought it was Rubio and Marocco who dismantled USAID, albeit at DOGE's direction.

[Anonymous]

So mad it took this long. But I guess glad there was a case and it has been ruled in USAID’s favor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So mad it took this long. But I guess glad there was a case and it has been ruled in USAID’s favor

Same!

Obviously closing USAID is illegal - not surprised there was a court case under the radar. All things told, less than 2 months is fast for a lawsuit. Musk is just moving really fast. And breaking lots of things.

[Anonymous]

Of course it must be reinstated. Then Congress can decide next steps. If Trump would like to make an argument to Congress that USAID should be wound down or folded into State, he is welcome to do so.

[Anonymous]

Cue Trump whining about judges doing their job.

[Anonymous]

Too late for some beneficiaries, particularly some infants of HIV-positive mothers. What Musk did was a crime against humanity.

For the record, I am fine with a slow, thoughtful and organized retreat from giving worldwide aid, and I am fine with a slow, thoughtful and organized reduction in force of the government in general.

But "move fast and break things" means just killing vulnerable people. And that's criminal.

[Anonymous]

So what actually happens now and what is supposed to happen now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So what actually happens now and what is supposed to happen now?

All the USAID employees who have been at home on admin leave will be permitted to come back and try to clean up the mess Elon made. Some of it is unfixable but hopefully something can be salvaged.

Then Trump can make a proposal to congress about how he would like to move forward in the next fiscal year.

[Anonymous]

Trump hasn’t been following the court rulings. What’s going to be different with this one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what actually happens now and what is supposed to happen now?

All the USAID employees who have been at home on admin leave will be permitted to come back and try to clean up the mess Elon made. Some of it is unfixable but hopefully something can be salvaged.

Then Trump can make a proposal to congress about how he would like to move forward in the next fiscal year.

I am one of these. It's totally unclear where we are supposed to go back to since they kicked us out of our buildings or what we are supposed to do since they canceled all our awards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump hasn’t been following the court rulings. What’s going to be different with this one?

He doesn’t owe his base on USAID. And he’s been splitting hairs on the Venezuelan deportees. Maybe he’ll appeal but they need to be brought back while he pursues his impoundment nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what actually happens now and what is supposed to happen now?

All the USAID employees who have been at home on admin leave will be permitted to come back and try to clean up the mess Elon made. Some of it is unfixable but hopefully something can be salvaged.

Then Trump can make a proposal to congress about how he would like to move forward in the next fiscal year.

I am one of these. It's totally unclear where we are supposed to go back to since they kicked us out of our buildings or what we are supposed to do since they canceled all our awards.

USAID is a smart agency and full of talented public servants. I bet you will find a way.

[Anonymous]

There was a review - albeit 6 weeks - and contracts were terminated after the review. The facts in the ruling are not actually what happened; therefore, the admin will just say that they did not do that. They reviewed contracts and cancelled them as allowed by the contracts.

[Anonymous]

The reality is the damage is done. Even if the host countries allowed the US back in, China and Russia have already filled the void, and no one trusts the USA anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was a review - albeit 6 weeks - and contracts were terminated after the review. The facts in the ruling are not actually what happened; therefore, the admin will just say that they did not do that. They reviewed contracts and cancelled them as allowed by the contracts.

There is evidence that 1) it was Musk who canceled the contracts, not Rubio/Marocco (and the court did not agree that the contracts were "reviewed" rather than just canceled without review) and 2) that lawsuit is still ongoing.