In a dramatic turn of events, federal marshals escorted officials from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) into the U.S. African Development Foundation (USADF) on Thursday. This move came just a day after USADF employees refused entry to DOGE workers and Pete Marocco, the State Department official overseeing foreign aid.
The forced entry highlights an ongoing power struggle between the Trump administration’s budget-slashing unit and the leadership of the USADF, a small agency with 55 employees and an annual budget of $45 million.
The Standoff and Forced Entry
According to reports, USADF officials had initially blocked DOGE representatives and Marocco from entering the premises, sparking tensions. However, on Thursday, federal marshals accompanied DOGE officials inside, and security personnel were instructed to change the locks to prevent further resistance.
Marocco, seen separately entering the building, reportedly spent a brief period inside before leaving. His involvement has fueled concerns that the Trump administration is attempting to seize control of USADF operations and install loyalists in key positions.
Legal Battle Ensues
Shortly after DOGE’s takeover of the agency, USADF President Ward Brehm filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court to block what he described as an unlawful seizure of power.
Brehm’s lawsuit seeks:
- A court injunction to stop the Trump administration from removing him as president.
- A legal order confirming that he remains the rightful leader of the agency.
- A ruling that prevents Pete Marocco or any other Trump-appointed official from assuming control.
His complaint warns that, without intervention, the agency’s structure could be permanently damaged within days.
White House Defends Its Actions
In response, the White House denied any wrongdoing and insisted that President Trump had the legal authority to appoint Marocco as acting chairman of the board while reducing USADF’s staff.
White House spokesperson Anna Kelly condemned agency officials for resisting the order, stating:
“Entitled, rogue bureaucrats have no authority to defy executive orders by the president of the United States or physically bar his representatives from entering the agencies they run.”
The administration argues that these actions are part of a broader effort to reform inefficient government spending and ensure taxpayer dollars are managed effectively.
Political and Ethical Implications
This controversial move raises serious questions about executive power, government efficiency, and the autonomy of federal agencies. Critics argue that seizing control of agencies through force and litigation undermines democratic governance, while supporters claim it’s necessary to eliminate bureaucratic resistance.
With legal battles now unfolding, the fate of the U.S. African Development Foundation and its leadership remains uncertain.
