Judge Halts USDA Reorganization

WASHINGTON (DTN) -- Unions representing U.S. Department of Agriculture employees secured a court-ordered stay Tuesday night halting key parts of the department's reorganization.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria extended the stay on office closures and employee relocations out of the Washington, D.C., region and to regional hubs through Dec. 11.

The ruling marks the third court challenge to USDA's authority to use appropriated funds for its reorganization and the first successful one for the plaintiffs in the case, American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) v. USDA.

This time, the court granted relief to the plaintiffs, temporarily blocking key elements of USDA's effort to consolidate offices and agency functions and reduce its workforce through attrition.

The restrictions on USDA's reorganization activities expire Dec. 11, 2026, in about two months, the same deadline as the government shutdown deadline.

Under the order, USDA is not required to return employees who have already relocated to their original duty stations. However, the agency is barred from closing or eliminating offices and relocating union employees outside the National Capital Region. The order applies to USDA's Food and Nutrition Service, Foreign Agricultural Service, Rural Development, Farm Production and Conservation mission area, Office of the General Counsel and Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights.

"Congress told USDA in plain language that it could not close offices and uproot its workforce without permission. USDA did it anyway, so AFGE and our partners took them to court. These forced moves were never about efficiency. They were about pushing experienced people out the door," said Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees.

Chhabria wrote, "If USDA wishes to move forward with the now-stayed reorganization activities, it can ask Congress to change the language of the next appropriations statute, either to give USDA broader spending authority or to express disagreement with the severability analysis set forth in this ruling."

Deputy Agriculture Secretary Steven Vaden said last week that the department was prepared to appeal to the appellate court.

"I know there are legal efforts afoot to try to stop us. We may have to go up to the appellate level. But just like with the other efforts to stop the American government from working more efficiently on behalf of the American taxpayer, these legal efforts will fail as well," Vaden said in an interview with Brownfield.

The judge disagreed with USDA's argument that relocating 2% of its workforce could not have any impact.

Chhabria said a reorganizing agency should be required to explain why its functions would or would not be affected. "If the reorganization will have a short-term programmatic impact, the agency ought to explain why the upside outweighs the downside," he wrote in a footnote to his order. The agency has not conducted a cost-benefit analysis of the reorganization, which is now in its second year.

See: "NIFA Says It Learned From 2019 Relocation. Its Workers Aren't So Sure," https://www.dtnpf.com/…

As relocations continue, workers are caught in the middle.

"This is just one battle in the ongoing war to defend the USDA's core programs and the staff that work on them," one USDA employee affected by the reorganization said, requesting anonymity to protect against retaliation.

See the court order: https://storage.courtlistener.com/…

Read the last report: "Judge Weighs USDA's Need for Congressional Approval to Reorganize, Vaden Prepares for Appeal," https://www.dtnpf.com/…

Jake Zajkowski can be reached at jake.zajkowski@dtn.com

Follow him on social platform X @jzajkow

(c) Copyright 2026 DTN, LLC. All rights reserved.