On March 11, 2025, a startling directive from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) sent shockwaves through Washington, D.C., and beyond. Erica Carr, the acting executive secretary of USAID, issued an email instructing the agency’s remaining staff to shred and burn classified documents and personnel files stored at its headquarters in the Ronald Reagan Building. This order, which surfaced amid the Trump administration’s aggressive efforts to dismantle the agency, has ignited fierce debate over its legality, intent, and implications.
The Directive: Shred First, Burn Later
The email, obtained by multiple news outlets including NBC News, The Washington Post, and The New York Times, thanked employees for their “assistance in clearing our classified safes and personnel documents.” It directed staff to prioritize shredding documents and to use burn bags—labeled with “SECRET” and “USAID/B/IO” in dark Sharpie—when shredders became unavailable or overwhelmed. The instruction was reportedly sent to roughly three dozen employees, a small fraction of USAID’s workforce, which has been drastically reduced following mass layoffs and program cancellations.
The timing of the order is notable. It comes as the Trump administration, with support from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), pushes to slash federal spending, including the near-total dismantling of USAID. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently announced the cancellation of 83% of USAID’s programs, while the agency’s global workforce has shrunk from over 10,000 to a projected 294 employees. The Ronald Reagan Building, once USAID’s bustling headquarters, is now slated to house U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Legal and Ethical Concerns
The directive has raised immediate red flags among unions, lawmakers, and legal experts. The American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), representing USAID workers, expressed alarm, stating that the destruction of classified and sensitive documents could violate federal law and destroy evidence pertinent to ongoing litigation. Multiple lawsuits challenge the Trump administration’s actions, including the mass termination of over 1,600 U.S.-based employees and the abrupt cessation of foreign aid programs. AFSA and other groups argue that these records are critical to their cases and to any potential effort to revive the agency.
The collection, retention, and disposal of classified materials and federal records are governed by strict regulations, including the Federal Records Act of 1950, which requires approval from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) before destruction. It remains unclear whether Carr or USAID leadership sought such approval. Improper handling of classified materials can constitute a crime, and critics, including Rep. Gregory Meeks, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, have accused the administration of attempting to erase evidence of wrongdoing. “Haphazardly shredding and burning USAID documents and personnel files seems like a great way to get rid of evidence,” Meeks said in a statement.
In response, unions representing USAID contractors swiftly filed an emergency motion in federal court on March 11, seeking a temporary restraining order to halt the destruction. U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, ordered both parties to submit a status report by the morning of March 12, signaling a rapid judicial response to the escalating controversy.
The White House Weighs In
The White House, through Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly, sought to downplay the directive’s significance. In a post on X, Kelly dismissed reports as “fake news hysteria,” asserting that the documents were “old, mostly courtesy content (content from other agencies), and the originals still exist on classified computer systems.” She emphasized that the order affected only a small group of employees and suggested the destruction was routine as the building prepares for its new occupants.
However, this explanation has failed to quell skepticism. A former USAID staffer, speaking to POLITICO, described the scale of the destruction as “unprecedented,” noting that while periodic document disposal is standard, the mass shredding and burning ordered by Carr deviates sharply from normal protocol. Critics question why such measures were deemed necessary if the materials were indeed redundant or preserved digitally.
A Broader Context: USAID’s Dismantling
The document destruction order is the latest chapter in a tumultuous period for USAID. Since January 2025, the Trump administration has moved swiftly to gut the agency, aligning with DOGE’s mission to eliminate $65 billion in federal spending. The cancellation of contracts, workforce reductions, and a freeze on foreign aid have drawn legal challenges and warnings of global consequences, including potential rises in disease and instability in regions dependent on U.S. assistance.
The directive also follows a separate controversy last month, when USAID’s top security officials were placed on leave after refusing DOGE team members access to classified systems without proper clearances. This incident underscored tensions between the administration’s efficiency drive and established security protocols.
What’s at Stake?
The implications of this order extend far beyond bureaucratic housekeeping. If the destroyed documents are not fully preserved elsewhere, they could hinder efforts to hold the administration accountable or to reconstruct USAID’s operations should courts rule against its dismantling. For critics, the move smacks of a deliberate attempt to obscure the agency’s activities—potentially including evidence of mismanagement or politically motivated decisions.
For supporters of the administration’s agenda, however, the destruction may be seen as a pragmatic step in winding down an agency they view as wasteful or misaligned with national priorities. The lack of transparency about the documents’ contents fuels this divide, leaving observers to speculate about what might be lost in the shredders and burn bags.
Looking Ahead
As of March 12, 2025, the fate of USAID’s records hangs in the balance. The federal court’s response to the unions’ motion will likely determine whether the destruction proceeds unchecked or is paused for scrutiny. Meanwhile, the incident has intensified calls for oversight of the Trump administration’s rapid restructuring of federal agencies.
The shredding and burning at USAID headquarters may mark a symbolic end to an agency once central to U.S. foreign policy—or it could ignite a legal and political firestorm that reverberates for months to come. For now, the embers of this controversy are just beginning to glow.
