Court order limits relocations
Speaking with reporters after an announcement about fertilizer production, Rollins rejected any suggestion that the administration was abandoning the overhaul. "We are full-bore ahead in the reorganization," she said. "We believe in it more today than we ever have — taking the USDA to our constituents, which is rural America, the Forest Service out West."
For now, USDA cannot carry out the plan. U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria in California halted the reorganization on Oct. 13 while he considers a challenge brought by federal employee unions, environmental groups and local officials, including those in California, Maryland and Washington state. The challengers contend that relocating staff is a way to achieve deep workforce reductions.
"If implemented, the planned reorganization activities will likely put thousands of USDA employees to the choice of relocating far from their current home — often to a different state — or losing their job," Chhabria wrote. He found that the administration "almost certainly" violated congressional limits on spending money for the reorganization that had been designated for other purposes.
The order prevents relocations affecting about 2,600 USDA employees while the court reviews the case, Government Executive reported. It extends a Sept. 14 administrative stay that suspended deadlines in all "management directed reassignment" letters the department had issued up to that point.
According to Deseret News and Government Executive, the injunction will last until at least Dec. 11. That is both the deadline for Congress to approve fiscal 2027 appropriations and the date when the spending provisions barring USDA from using funds for reorganization are currently set to expire.
Headquarters move and office closures
The Forest Service proposal would shift its headquarters from Washington to Salt Lake City and replace its regional structure with state offices. It sits within a larger USDA realignment that would also alter food and nutrition programs, rural development and other services.
Deseret News reported that the plan Rollins announced in March 2026 calls for 15 state directors to oversee operations in individual states. Establishing that structure would require shutting nine regional offices and 23 research locations.
The administration narrowed the research closures last month, saying 41 facilities previously at risk would stay open. The 23 research stations remain slated for closure.
USDA officials argue that the changes would reduce costs and direct more resources toward Western states, where nearly 90% of national forest lands are located. The agency's responsibilities extend well beyond that region: According to the Congressional Research Service, the Forest Service manages 193 million acres of national forests, national grasslands and other National Forest System lands across 43 states, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox has described the proposed reorganization and Salt Lake City headquarters as "a big win for Utah and the West." After the court ruling, Cox joined state Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz in criticizing the decision. Their joint statement argued that decisions about Western forests belong closer to people familiar with those lands, rather than "by bureaucrats and special interests thousands of miles away in Washington, D.C." Republican lawmakers also say the plan would bring more local input into agency decisions.
Workforce losses and questions about savings
USDA has already been removing management layers as part of President Donald Trump's effort to shrink the federal workforce and improve efficiency. Government figures show that Forest Service staffing has fallen about 16% under Trump, from more than 39,000 employees to 33,000.
The National Federation of Federal Employees said its survey of Forest Service workers found that a large majority opposed the proposed reorganization and most did not want to relocate.
Chris Iverson, a Forest Service veteran of almost three decades who retired from a leadership role during Trump's first term, questioned how much money the overhaul would save. He warned that it could drive out experienced employees, including those with wildfire expertise.
Iverson also said replacing regional offices with state offices could give governors more influence as they advance timber, oil and gas, and grazing interests. "It's just going to be a closer alignment of Forest Service leadership with state government priorities," he said.
A previous headquarters relocation was later undone. In Trump's first term, his administration moved the Bureau of Land Management to Colorado, arguing in part that senior officials should work closer to the public lands they manage. Two years later, the Biden administration returned the headquarters to Washington.
A separate fight over wildfire management
Trump also wants to transfer the Forest Service's wildfire responsibilities to the U.S. Wildland Fire Service, a change Congress has so far blocked. The Congressional Research Service says the new service was established on Jan. 12, 2026, within the Interior Department's Office of the Secretary to bring together Interior's wildland fire management programs.
The proposed transfer comes as worsening wildfires, driven by climate change in recent decades, have taken up more of the Forest Service budget and pushed officials to seek savings in other areas.
Trump's fiscal 2027 budget request sought $6.91 billion for a unified service combining Interior and Forest Service wildland fire programs, according to the Congressional Research Service. Its proposed responsibilities would include wildfire management, risk reduction and recovery of burned areas across roughly 700 million acres managed by Interior and the Forest Service.
The House Appropriations Committee took a different approach in H.R. 9171. Its bill would maintain separate programs, providing $1.54 billion for the U.S. Wildland Fire Service and $5.20 billion for Forest Service wildland fire management.
