The government cuts ordered by the Trump administration have impacted the Central Intelligence Agency (C.I.A.).
Some officers hired in the last two years have been summoned to a location away from the agency’s headquarters in Langley, Virginia, and asked to surrender their credentials to security personnel, according to sources briefed on the firings.
The firings are intended to reduce the ranks of newly hired officers, referred to as “probationary employees.” A spokeswoman for the agency confirmed that some officers hired in the past two years had been terminated.
While it remains unclear how many officers will be dismissed, sources indicated that not all recent hires would be affected. The officers were not informed of the reasons for their summoning, but many were aware of the firings occurring across the U.S. government.
Some young agency officers working at Langley have expressed reluctance to answer their phones, fearing a call from security requesting their presence at an off-site location. The firings have reportedly harmed morale and reduced productivity this week, according to those briefed on the situation.
A spokeswoman stated that the C.I.A. is reviewing personnel who joined the agency within the last two years, noting that C.I.A. officers handle fast-paced and stressful situations, which may not be suitable for everyone.
Sources familiar with the firings mentioned that there appeared to be fewer dismissals in critical areas such as intelligence gathering on China and Mexican drug cartels.
The firings follow a recent federal court ruling that allows C.I.A. Director John Ratcliffe to terminate employees at will. Judge Anthony J. Trenga of the Eastern District of Virginia ruled on a lawsuit filed by officers involved in diversity and recruiting efforts during the Biden administration.
Judge Trenga affirmed that Mr. Ratcliffe has the authority to remove any C.I.A. officer for any reason without the right to appeal, dismissing claims that the officers’ due process or free speech rights were violated.
Following the judge’s ruling, the C.I.A.’s general counsel permitted Mr. Ratcliffe to continue reducing the agency's workforce. However, Kevin Carroll, a lawyer representing terminated agency employees, noted that Judge Trenga recommended allowing the dismissed employees to appeal their terminations.
The recruiters involved were among the agency’s most successful, with 2024 marking the C.I.A.'s best recruiting effort since the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Currently, those recruiters and the officers they brought in face potential job loss.
The C.I.A.’s regulations for dismissing probationary employees differ from those reviewed by Judge Trenga. It remains uncertain whether the agency has adhered to its own procedures or is relying on Mr. Ratcliffe’s broad dismissal authority.
C.I.A. officers are formally on probation for four years, but the Office of Personnel Management has focused on reducing the number of more recent hires. Additionally, experienced officers transferring from other intelligence agencies also undergo a lengthy probationary period.
Last month, the C.I.A. sent a list of employees with less than two years of experience to the Office of Personnel Management in an unclassified email, complying with White House directives to decrease the federal workforce. Although the list contained only first names and last initials, former officials expressed concern that using an unclassified email system posed a counterintelligence risk.
Former officials warned that the removal of newly recruited officers could create gaps in intelligence efforts, adversely affecting the collection and analysis of information across various domains.
The initial two years of a C.I.A. officer's career involve intensive training, with significant government investment in teaching them essential skills such as spy tradecraft and languages.
“Literally millions of dollars have been invested in some of these probationary employees,” Mr. Carroll stated.