Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s USAGM Job Cuts, Protects Voice of America

In Washington, a federal judge on Monday temporarily halted the Trump administration’s plan to eliminate hundreds of jobs at the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which runs Voice of America (VOA) – a state-funded language network created during World War II to counter Nazi propaganda.

Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that USAGM cannot implement a staffing reduction that would lead to the firing of 532 full-time employees – the majority of the agency’s remaining staff.

The agency’s acting head Kari Leake announced in August that the reductions would take effect on Tuesday. However, the court’s decision preserves the status quo until Lamberth issues a final ruling on the lawsuit and the motion to overturn the reductions.

The defendants’ failure to provide this court with information about whether their plans to reduce staff meet the requirements of the preliminary injunction has wasted valuable court time and resources and easily supports contempt-of-court proceedings.

Lamberth previously ruled that the Trump administration must restore VOA programming to a level that meets its lawful mandate to provide reliable and authoritative news, and prohibited Leake from firing VOA director Michael Abramowitz.

However, the court’s respect for the plaintiffs regarding further actions should not be mistaken as leniency toward the defendants’ disgraceful prior conduct.

Context and Implications for U.S. Broadcasting

USAGM also encompasses Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, Middle East Broadcasting Networks, and Radio Marti, which together reach roughly 427 million people. In fiscal year 2025, Congress appropriated $875 million to the agency, of which $260 million is to be spent on VOA.

In March, Trump signed an executive order requiring a reduction of “statutory functions and related personnel to the minimum level.” After this, VOA halted broadcasting for the first time in 83 years, most staff were placed on administrative leave. Following Kari Leake’s public statements on social media, the agency said it intended to preserve its mission and improve its operations.

Plaintiffs in the case contend that the proposed cuts could undermine the enforcement of previous court rulings, while the parties anticipate further steps in the litigation.

Overall, the court case is ongoing, and both sides are preparing for further action. The anticipated moves by the defendants and plaintiffs could shape VOA’s future and its ability to provide reliable and accessible broadcasting on a global scale.