State Department layoffs begin Friday with 1,300 job cuts. Here’s the breakdown

The U.S. State Department is preparing to let go of more than 1,300 employees starting this Friday, marking one of the largest staff reductions in the department’s recent history. The decision comes in the wake of a significant Supreme Court ruling, which allowed greater flexibility for federal agencies to carry out large-scale changes without the same level of judicial oversight that previously limited such moves. This ruling has essentially cleared the path for Secretary of State Marco Rubio to move forward with a controversial reorganization plan that he has been quietly preparing for months.

According to internal documents and reporting from multiple major news outlets, including CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post, the layoffs will impact both civil and foreign service workers. Specifically, about 1,107 civil service employees and 246 foreign service officers will lose their jobs. But the numbers go even higher when considering the broader impact of the restructuring. Hundreds of offices and bureaus are expected to be eliminated entirely, and when including voluntary departures and early retirements, nearly 3,000 people in total will be leaving the department. This represents a sweeping downsizing of the workforce responsible for executing U.S. foreign policy, international relations, diplomatic services, and global engagement.

Marco Rubio first introduced the idea of reshaping the State Department back in April. At that time, he described the agency as “bloated,” implying it had grown too large, inefficient, and out of sync with the administration’s priorities. But it quickly became clear that his reasoning went beyond just trimming budgets. Rubio openly suggested that the restructuring was partly ideological. He claimed that many within the department were loyal to what he described as “radical political ideologies,” and he saw the downsizing as a way to “realign” the agency with the Trump administration’s political and diplomatic direction. This approach has raised alarms among critics, who view the move not just as an administrative reorganization, but as a form of political purging—removing career officials who may not agree with the administration’s policies or who represent nonpartisan government service traditions.

Some employees reportedly received early notifications about their jobs being at risk as early as Thursday. Others are expected to be formally notified on Friday. The suddenness of the notices and the speed of the rollout have created a sense of confusion and anxiety among department staff. For many career diplomats and public servants, the move represents not only a professional disruption but also an erosion of the institutional knowledge and experience that has guided U.S. diplomacy for generations.

This wave of layoffs is not happening in isolation. It’s part of a much larger trend under the Trump administration, which has been steadily shrinking the size and reach of various federal agencies. In many cases, these cuts are seen as a way to divert funds toward other priorities, most notably the administration’s massive tax cut bill. That bill, now passed into law, is expected to increase the primary deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next ten years. Including interest payments on the growing debt, the total impact could be closer to $3 trillion, according to estimates by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

Critics argue that this redirection of resources—from federal agencies responsible for governance, diplomacy, regulation, and public services, to tax cuts that largely benefit corporations and high-income earners—marks a fundamental shift in the federal government’s role. They say the administration is not just downsizing, but dismantling the traditional framework of U.S. governance, where nonpartisan public institutions are supposed to operate independently of political agendas.

Supporters of the move see it differently. They believe the government has become too large and inefficient and that these layoffs are necessary to reduce waste, streamline operations, and ensure that federal agencies reflect the values and goals of the elected leadership. For them, the layoffs represent accountability and a reassertion of executive control over a government they believe has been run for too long by unelected bureaucrats.

Regardless of perspective, the immediate consequences are real and far-reaching. With the loss of so many experienced diplomats and civil servants, the United States could face a weakened presence on the world stage. It may take years, or even decades, to rebuild the expertise and relationships that are now being dismantled. For the individuals losing their jobs, the impact is personal and life-changing. For the country, it represents a deeper transformation of what the U.S. government is, how it functions, and whose interests it ultimately serves.