Last week, the Office of Talent Acquisition began notifying new employees that their orientation class will begin Sept. 22, according to an email obtained by Government Executive. About 99 new employees will join the Foreign Service class, according to people involved in or familiar with the plans. 

In July, State issued reduction-in-force notices to 1,350 employees, including about 250 FSOs.

Current and laid-off employees wonder why cuts were made if State planned to begin hiring again so soon. Foreign Service Officers are flexible; most work as generalists, switching roles and locations every few years. 

“The optics are terrible," said one State employee familiar with the hiring plans.

A Foreign Service Officer affected by the layoffs said the new hiring demonstrates a lack of consistent thinking. “They indiscriminately fired hundreds only to turn around and start hiring almost immediately,” the soon-to-be-former officer said. 

Another laid-off Foreign Service Officer called the approach wasteful because State has invested in training each diplomat throughout their career. 

“So the idea of firing 250 FSOs only to bring in more people in their wake is totally inefficient and the definition of wasteful government spending,” the laid-off staffer said. 

That person added the approach will open the door to the Trump administration intimidating new employees “who don’t know the rules of the road or when and how to push back.” 

A department spokesperson said State "welcomes a new class" of FSOs, calling the process standard. 

"This new class will be filling entry-level positions throughout the department that were maintained in the reorganization," the spokesperson said.

State officials said ahead of the July layoffs that the department’s reorganization was meant to “refocus” its mission on core objectives and modern needs. The department was not saying those affected by the layoffs “weren't doing a good job or weren't valuable members of the State Department family,” one official said, but the administration had an obligation to “do what's right for the mission and what's right for the American people.”

While the duties and areas in which FSOs serve shift regularly, State said it was targeting staff because of the offices in which they were serving in that moment. Some of those laid off have subsequently been awarded promotions for outstanding performance, though their RIFs remain in effect. 

Under President Biden, the Foreign Service grew by 6% at State and the department last year brought on 235 people in its largest class size ever. In May, the Trump administration welcomed another cohort of 104 Foreign Service personnel. 

While the Trump administration has ushered hundreds of thousands of employees out of government since January, State is just the latest example of an agency seeking to unwind some of that work. The departments of Treasury, Health and Human Services and Labor have rescinded layoffs to fill staffing needs, while the Agriculture Department, Justice Department, Social Security Administration and other agencies have moved employees around to ensure continuity of critical functions. 

The ruling from Senior U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer represents an obstacle to any further use of National Guard troops to assist local police in more cities. Following deployments to LA and Washington, D.C., Trump has openly mused about federalizing other state National Guard troops and sending them to major cities like Chicago and Baltimore he says are overwhelmed with crime.

Breyer, whom Democratic President Bill Clinton appointed in 1997, said Trump could not use the National Guard for a wide array of police activities in California. His order goes into effect Sept. 12.

Breyer said the roughly 4,700 Guard members and Marines engaged in police activity in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which he said built on the constitutional framers’ wariness of a centralized military force conducting police work.

“Contrary to Congress’s explicit instruction, federal troops executed the laws,” Breyer wrote in a 52-page opinion. “Defendants systematically used armed soldiers (whose identity was often obscured by protective armor) and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles. In short, Defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act.”

National Guard expanded

The judge expressed concern about Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s statements they wanted to expand the role of National Guard troops for law enforcement.

“President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have stated their intention to call National Guard troops into federal service in other cities across the country… thus creating a national police force with the President as its chief,” he wrote.

The issue itself dates much further back in U.S. history, forming part of the basis for the country’s break from the English monarchy, Breyer noted.

“Indeed, resentment of Britain’s use of military troops as a police force was manifested in the Declaration of Independence, where one of the American colonists’ grievances was that the King had ‘affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power,’” he wrote.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who sued to block Trump’s federalization of the state’s National Guard, said the ruling “sided with democracy and the Constitution” and echoed Breyer’s warning about Trump leading a national police force.

“No president is a king — not even Trump — and no president can trample a state’s power to protect its people,” Newsom said. “Trump’s attempt to use federal troops as his personal police force is illegal, authoritarian, and must be stopped in every courtroom across this country.”

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass also cheered the decision.

“The White House tried to invade the second largest city in the country,” she wrote. “That’s illegal. Los Angeles will not buckle and we will not break. We will not be divided and we will not be defeated.”

Spokespeople for the White House did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Return to appeals court likely

Trump is likely to appeal the ruling to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, where he won a victory early in the case.

After Breyer issued a temporary restraining order in June calling on Trump to return control of the state’s National Guard to Newsom, a 9th Circuit panel unanimously blocked it from going into effect, ruling that U.S. Supreme Court precedent allowed Trump to make the determination that the proper circumstances existed to federalize National Guard troops.

That appeals ruling dealt with Breyer’s finding that Trump likely violated the president’s legal authority to federalize National Guard troops.

The appeal did not consider potential Posse Comitatus Act violations, Breyer said Tuesday. 

This report was originally published by Stateline.