![Parents Threatened To Email A Business Partner And Get Them To Stop Working With Me [closed]](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/workplace/Img/apple-touch-icon@2.png?v=d39b333f5c58)
![[Tutorial] Chapter 4: Task and Comment Plugins](https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2Ffl10oejjhn82dwrsm2n2.png)
_Porntep_Lueangon_Alamy.jpg?#)
Judge bars firing of intelligence officers working on DEI issues
A federal judge temporarily barred two intelligence agencies from terminating employees who had been assigned to work on diversity efforts. The order blocks the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA from firing 11 anonymous employees working in diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility (DEIA) related roles as litigation continues. The suit describes...
A federal judge temporarily barred two intelligence agencies from terminating employees who had been assigned to work on diversity efforts.
The order blocks the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA from firing 11 anonymous employees working in diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility (DEIA) related roles as litigation continues.
The suit describes the plaintiff as “highly-trained U.S. intelligence officers” and notes the employees were temporarily assigned to work on DEIA issues.
“None of these officer’s activities was or is illegal, and at no time have the agencies employing Plaintiffs contended that they individually engaged in any misconduct, nor are they accused of poor performance,” the suit, filed Tuesday, said.
The lawsuit noted that employees were swiftly placed on administrative leave after President Trump took office but were informed Friday to report to work with their badges.
“In Plaintiffs’ many years of experience within the IC, this summons means they are imminently to be terminated or placed on leave without pay,” the suit said, using an abbreviation for the intelligence community.
The suit argues that the two agencies violated the law by not providing “any individual accusation of misconduct.”
“Plaintiffs are being fired because of their assumed beliefs about a domestic political issue, and losing their property interest in their employment without due process of law,” it states.
