U.S. Institute of Peace Files Lawsuit Against Trump Administration Over Contentious Takeover
Washington D.C. – The United States Institute of Peace (USIP), a non-profit organization dedicated to resolving conflicts globally, has initiated legal action against President Donald Trump, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and several individuals following a series of escalating conflicts that culminated in a disputed takeover of the institute’s headquarters earlier this week.
The lawsuit, filed on Tuesday in federal court, seeks to reverse actions taken by DOGE, an agency under the purview of the Trump administration, to occupy USIP headquarters and install new leadership at the organization. The legal challenge alleges that DOGE’s actions were unlawful, exceeding its authority and violating the institute’s established independence.
The controversy reached a boiling point on Monday when DOGE team members, accompanied by officers from the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, gained access to the USIP building. This move was perceived by USIP representatives as an unwarranted intrusion and a direct challenge to the organization’s autonomy.
The Trump administration, along with its ally, billionaire Elon Musk, has publicly expressed its intent to streamline the federal government and reduce the workforce, a goal that has placed USIP in the crosshairs. USIP argues that its employees are not federal workers and that the institute operates independently of the executive branch, despite receiving annual funding from Congress.
The lawsuit asserts that USIP’s unique status, as an organization founded by and funded by Congress, shields it from executive branch interference. The complaint details a series of events leading up to the takeover, including attempts by DOGE to access the institute’s facilities and the issuance of termination notices to several members of the USIP board of directors.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt responded to the lawsuit, criticizing what she characterized as resistance from "rogue bureaucrats" within USIP. Leavitt defended President Trump’s efforts to implement change, asserting that the USIP employees were obstructing the administration’s mandate.
"This is what DOGE and this administration is facing," Leavitt stated during a press briefing on Wednesday. "It’s a resistance from bureaucrats who don’t want to see change in this city."
A White House spokesperson declined to address specific allegations outlined in the lawsuit but reiterated the administration’s commitment to enforcing presidential authority and ensuring accountability among government agencies.
"Rogue bureaucrats will not be allowed to hold agencies hostage," the spokesperson said in a statement. "The Trump administration will enforce the President’s executive authority and ensure his agencies remain accountable to the American people."
USIP was established by Congress in 1984 during the Reagan administration, and its mission is to prevent and resolve violent conflicts worldwide. The institute’s work encompasses research, education, and direct engagement in conflict zones.
In a letter sent earlier this month to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), George Moose, the former president of USIP, argued that the institute’s work aligns with President Trump’s priorities regarding conflict prevention and keeping the United States out of foreign wars.
“As has been the case throughout its 40 years of existence,” Moose wrote, “the Institute is committed to the efficient and responsible deployment of taxpayer funds in cooperation with Congress and the Administration.”
The lawsuit emphasizes that USIP’s efforts to promote peace and stability globally align with Trump’s stated goals of increasing government efficiency and effectiveness. However, the lawsuit alleges that President Trump has deemed the Institute "unnecessary" and taken steps to undermine its operations.
Tensions between DOGE and USIP escalated last month after Trump signed an executive order directing several agencies, including USIP, to reduce their personnel "to the minimum presence and function required by law" within a two-week timeframe.
USIP argues that the executive order incorrectly classified the institute as a "governmental entit[y]" and part of the "federal bureaucracy." The lawsuit claims that DOGE contacted USIP the following day to schedule a virtual meeting.
During the meeting, Moose and George Foote, USIP’s outside counsel, clarified the institute’s independent status. According to Moose, a DOGE staffer acknowledged their understanding of USIP’s position and indicated they would "regroup."
However, days after Moose sent his letter to OMB, he became aware of inquiries made by DOGE staffers regarding USIP’s building security. By this time, members of Musk’s DOGE team had already gained access to the offices of several executive agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Foote sent an email to DOGE staffers informing them that any "unauthorized personnel would only be admitted with a valid warrant issued by a court." The lawsuit states that Foote’s message went unanswered.
On Friday, multiple board members received termination notices via email. Lawyers representing USIP and the targeted board members argue that the terminations did not adhere to proper procedure and are therefore invalid. They cite the stipulations for dismissal, which require evidence of wrongdoing, such as a felony conviction; agreement from at least eight other board members; or a majority vote from specific House and Senate committees.
Shortly after the board members received the termination notices, DOGE staffers arrived at USIP’s office building near the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. After being denied entry, they returned later that evening with FBI agents and a notice stating that the board now consisted of three people: Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and National Defense University President Peter Garvin.
The lawsuit alleges that Rubio, Hegseth, and Garvin, acting as the remaining members of the board, decided to remove Moose and replace him with State Department official Kenneth Jackson. Rubio, Hegseth, and Garvin are also named as defendants in USIP’s lawsuit.
On Sunday evening, Foote, Moose, and USIP’s chief of security terminated their contract with a private security company, Inter-Con, fearing that DOGE would coerce the contractors into granting them access to the headquarters.
The following afternoon, four members of Inter-Con’s team arrived at USIP’s office. After they were unable to enter using their deactivated security badges, one former employee used a physical key that USIP had not yet confiscated to gain entry.
The lawsuit states that the building was put under lockdown, and Foote contacted the Metropolitan Police Department. The contractors eventually left after being warned multiple times that they were trespassing.
Jackson, the Trump administration’s appointee to be the new USIP president, arrived later in a Black SUV. He spoke briefly with Foote and another lawyer before leaving the premises.
Hours later on Monday, Jackson and members of DOGE returned, accompanied by police officers. According to the Metropolitan Police Department, they were contacted by the U.S. Attorneys Office and dispatched to the scene. Jackson reportedly presented officers "with documentation that he was the acting USIP President." The police department stated that all "unauthorized individuals" eventually vacated the premises without incident, and no arrests were made.
As they were being escorted out, Foote said in the lawsuit that he and others were informed they would be able to retrieve their belongings at a later date. As of Tuesday, when the lawsuit was filed, their possessions, including their cars, remained at the institute’s headquarters.
The lawsuit represents a significant challenge to the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape the federal government and assert control over independent organizations. The outcome of the legal battle could have far-reaching implications for the autonomy of non-profit organizations that receive federal funding and their ability to operate independently of executive branch interference.
