EXCLUSIVE: Trump Administration Suffers Major Court Blow — Judge Says 19 Intelligence Officers 'Likely Had Rights Violated in DEI Purge'
A federal appeals court found 19 career intelligence officers likely suffered due process violations following DEIA-related layoffs.
July 2 2026, Published 7:42 p.m. ET
A federal appeals court has found that nineteen career intelligence officers who were swept up in the Trump administration's effort to eliminate diversity-related positions are likely to succeed on claims their constitutional due process rights were violated, RadarOnline.com can exclusively reveal.
According to newly obtained court documents reviewed by us on Thursday, July 3, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s preliminary injunction requiring the Central Intelligence Agency and Office of the Director of National Intelligence to follow their own internal termination procedures before firing the employees, allowing the officers to seek reassignment and pursue internal appeals while the lawsuit continues.
DEI Purge Triggered Lawsuit
President Trump signed executive orders directing federal agencies to dismantle DEIA programs.
The lawsuit was brought by 19 career intelligence officers identified in court records as John and Jane Does. According to the opinion, many of the employees had been temporarily assigned to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) roles before President Trump signed executive orders directing federal agencies to dismantle DEI programs across the government.
The officers were subsequently placed on administrative leave before being notified they would be terminated. The opinion noted the agencies never claimed any of the officers engaged in misconduct or poor job performance.
Instead, the CIA acknowledged the terminations were carried out to implement the administration's executive orders dismantling DEIA programs across the federal government.
Court Backs Intelligence Officers' Claims
The Fourth Circuit said the CIA director must follow its own procedures when terminating employees.
Writing for the majority, the appeals court concluded the officers are likely to prevail on their argument that the agencies violated their Fifth Amendment due process rights by refusing to provide procedures guaranteed under the agencies' own termination regulations.
Those procedures include opportunities to seek reassignment elsewhere within the agencies and to internally appeal termination decisions before their employment ends.
The court document emphasized the dispute is not whether the CIA director possesses the authority to terminate employees.
Instead, the judges found the agencies must still comply with their own internal rules when carrying out those decisions.
Court Rejects Government Argument
Records showed the agencies implemented the terminations to carry out Trump's executive orders targeting DEIA programs.
The court also rejected the government's argument that it could avoid those obligations because the terminations stemmed from a reduction in force, writing that agencies cannot ignore their own procedures and then rely on that failure to escape future responsibilities under the same regulations.
Notably, the court pointed out there were no allegations that the intelligence officers engaged in misconduct or poor job performance.
Rather, the record showed the agencies implemented the terminations to carry out Trump's executive orders targeting DEIA programs and related guidance issued by the Office of Personnel Management.
Judges Keep Injunction Intact
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
The ruling does not resolve the underlying lawsuit but leaves the preliminary injunction in place as the officers continue pursuing.
The three-judge panel also found that requiring the agencies to follow their own rules imposed only a minimal burden while protecting employees from losing procedural rights guaranteed under agency policy as the litigation moves forward.
The ruling does not resolve the underlying lawsuit but leaves the preliminary injunction in place as the officers continue pursuing their constitutional claims against the agencies.
As a result of Thursday's decision, the preliminary injunction will remain in place while the litigation proceeds, preventing the CIA and ODNI from finalizing the officers’ terminations until they are provided the reassignment and internal appeal rights outlined in agency policy.
