"It's a Madhouse": US State Department Workers Reeling After Trump's Firings

Washington D.C., USA – Workers at the U.S. State Department are reportedly experiencing critically low morale and anticipating long-term detrimental impacts following a wave of firings, resignation buyouts, a proposed 48% budget cut, and a comprehensive reorganization under the Trump administration. Approximately 3,000 employees have left the agency as a result of these sweeping changes.

Foreign programs and services specifically designed for LGBTQ+ communities, maternal and reproductive health, and minority groups have either been eliminated or significantly curtailed. This drastic shift is attributed to the pursuit of far-right ideological policies by a 26-year-old senior advisor and Trump appointee within the agency.

Senate Democrats and current State Department employees have vociferously criticized the recent firings, characterizing them as "unlawful," "sloppy," and "rushed."

More than 1,350 State Department employees received Reduction In Force (RIF) notices on July 11th, a move that followed the Supreme Court lifting injunctions that had previously blocked the Trump administration from proceeding with these layoffs. This figure represents approximately 15% of the domestic workforce. In total, around 3,000 employees have departed the agency through the RIF process and early retirement or resignation buyout packages.

During a Senate committee hearing on July 16th concerning these cuts, Michael Rigas, the Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, claimed that "The 15% number that you referenced came from our initial assessment after consulting with the under secretaries," and asserted "certainly" that an analysis of the costs and benefits of the cuts had been performed. However, Jose Mercado, who was recently laid off after 29 years of service at the State Department, directly refuted Rigas's claims. "There was no consulting. There was no analyzing. He is absolutely incorrect in the information that he provided, especially when answering Representative Meeks’ last questioning. It was the least transparent process that you can ever imagine, and it was directed. It was not up to the undersecretaries. It was very directed from top down," stated Mercado, who previously served as Deputy Director of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor’s Office of Western Hemisphere Affairs. He further added, "By law and by practice, this is why it’s not supposed to happen this way. This was not done within the confines of the law. The procedures were rewritten so they could do this."

The American Federation of Government Employees, the union representing federal workers, has indicated its preparation of legal challenges to the Reduction In Force at the State Department.

A policy advisor at the State Department, who chose to remain anonymous due to fears of retaliation, alleged that veterans, employees with seniority, or those with disabilities would typically not be terminated without being offered alternative positions, nor would personnel undergoing training with the Department of Defense.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State cited the Supreme Court's decision to permit RIFs by the Trump administration to move forward, arguing that the reduction in force was lawful, although the court did not specifically address the legality of the underlying efforts. They maintained that the layoffs were conducted in accordance with applicable law and offered no comment on any additional layoffs or the proposed budget cut.

Plummeting Morale and a Shift Towards Far-Right Ideologies

The policy advisor noted that in recent months, morale within the department has plummeted, and a culture of "keeping your head down" has become prevalent in anticipation of further cuts. They also mentioned that staffers faced restrictions on which organizations or embassies they could meet with.

"They were asking that any meetings we had were approved by senior leadership in the bureau, which was unheard of," the advisor said. "Because of the political sensitivities of this administration."

They argued that these cuts directly impact national security, as human rights and the diplomatic corps have been sidelined in favor of pushing far-right ideologies. The advisor explained that annual human rights reports compiled by staffers and submitted to Congress by February had sections related to maternal and reproductive health, LGBTQ+ rights, or minority groups removed by Trump administration officials, because these issues did not align with the administration's "America first" priority.

The advisor also cited Samuel Samson, a 27-year-old Trump political appointee, as an example. Samson recently authored a Substack article, published by the State Department, which criticized Europe for "mass migration" and condemned criminal investigations into far-right factions in the UK and Germany.

Samson has reportedly proposed that the State Department directly fund French far-right leader Marine Le Pen, who is currently facing embezzlement charges in France. He also recently undertook a trip to South Africa, which the advisor claimed was also used as a family vacation.

A spokesperson for the State Department stated that the trip to South Africa was to meet with government leaders and civil society regarding the Expropriation Act, which has been criticized as unfair to white landowners, and to discuss the rights of white minorities in South Africa, aligning with Trump administration priorities.

"They’re getting rid of people who are defending human rights across the world, and those are being cut to promote the type of ideology that is completely out of line with mainstream political and foreign policy thought," the advisor asserted. "They’re talking about ‘remigration’', a far-right European concept of cleansing via mass deportations or promoting voluntary return of non-white immigrants and their descendants. It’s a madhouse."

Long-Term Impacts of the Cuts

Mercado explained that after the 2024 presidential election, employees anticipated typical changes that accompany shifts in presidential administrations, but were surprised when no guidance was provided even after Donald Trump assumed office in January 2025.

"We were not receiving any guidance whatsoever on what they wanted us to work on, which was, at the time, kind of strange, because we’re used to getting that information relatively quickly," Mercado said. "We were getting excluded from a lot of the decision making and policy writing, action memos, information memos, so that the regular workflow that we were in, that started getting less and less brought into the fold."

Subsequently, upon the administration's arrival, USAID was reportedly dismantled, and rumors began circulating about impending cuts at the U.S. State Department.

"It was a hard pill to swallow once we found out that we were gone, but all of this time, it was understood that this was going to affect the civil service. A lot of folks did not think that the Foreign Service would get touched," Mercado added. "We served as a check and balance, we provided an outsider’s view to an extent within the department. We understand you want to do X and Y with nation Z, but here are the things that you need to consider before you do that." Mercado emphasized that his department provided crucial information and acted as a counterbalance when the National Security Council and other high-level policymakers were considering decisions, particularly regarding nations with human rights issues, to help improve those situations and facilitate engagement for U.S. government, businesses, and organizations.

"The institutional knowledge that’s lost in that, in the end, will affect the American people," he warned regarding the impacts of the cuts. "Diminished capabilities, weaker foreign policy and by getting rid of their watchdog, which you could consider us that when it comes to human rights and democracy, it now leaves the door open for unsavory business practices."

The policy advisor argued that the national security risks posed by defunding and cutting staff at the State Department have also been previously claimed by former Trump officials at the Department of Defense.

"They’re essentially destroying people’s lives based on some capricious nature of this administration to impose and create some political ideology," the advisor said. "And the Department of Defense has actually been the biggest critic of cuts at the State Department. Gen Jim Mattis, the former secretary of defense under Trump, has said if you’re not going to fund the State Department, you need to buy me more bullets."

In 2013, during a Senate hearing, Mattis, then commander of the US Central Command, famously told senators: "The more that we put into the State Department’s diplomacy, hopefully the less we have to put into a military budget."

A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State maintained that the layoffs and cuts preserved critical functions.