A federal judge has extended his block on USDA's reorganization at least through Dec. 11, ruling the department likely broke the law by spending money on office closures and employee relocations that Congress never approved.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, sitting in the Northern District of California, found that the fiscal 2026 agriculture appropriations bill bars USDA from reprogramming funds to carry out the restructuring affecting thousands of employees. The bill requires USDA to obtain permission from the Senate and House appropriations committees first. USDA never sought that sign-off.

Chhabria first stayed the reorganization shortly after employee unions filed suit last month. His new order converts that pause into a preliminary injunction that runs until the current continuing resolution expires on Dec. 11 — the earliest Congress could rewrite the funding terms.

What did the judge actually decide?

Both sides agreed on one point: the provision requiring approval from appropriations committees is unconstitutional. Chhabria conceded that. But he held the underlying prohibition on reprogramming still stands.

The bill's explanatory statement, USDA's own documents, and President Donald Trump's budget submission together "show that Congress almost certainly did not intend for these funds to be used for office closures or employee relocations at the time it appropriated them," Chhabria wrote. He reached the same conclusion on a parallel provision funding the Forest Service, which sits inside USDA.

"The plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their claim that the closures and relocations are contrary to law," the judge said.

He also swatted away USDA's claims of operational harm. Much of the damage, he wrote, "amounts to self-inflicted harm caused by its decision to proceed with an unlawful reorganization effort."

Who is covered?

Chhabria considered limiting the order to union members. He rejected that idea. Splitting bargaining-unit employees from non-union staff would force USDA to run two offices with two sets of staff, he wrote, spending appropriated money twice.

"The most appropriate remedy is indeed to stay USDA's reorganization expenditures, full stop," the order said. Waiting would also make meaningful relief impossible later: "Much of the damage will already have been done."

The plaintiffs include four unions: the American Federation of Government Employees; American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; National Federation of Federal Employees; and National Treasury Employees Union. Chhabria noted they hold dues-paying members in every USDA component targeted by the reorganization:

• Forest Service
• Food and Nutrition Administration
• Research, Education and Economics mission area
• Foreign Agricultural Service
• Rural Development mission area
• Farm Production and Conservation mission area
• Office of the General Counsel
• Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

That list spans the agencies farmers deal with daily — FSA and NRCS fall under Farm Production and Conservation, while FAS runs export promotion and Rural Development backs loans and infrastructure.

What exemptions remain?

The order carves out one narrow exception. USDA may still reassign employees within the National Capital Region to other offices in that region, and may close facilities there once all staff have been relocated within it.

Chhabria gave USDA two deadlines. The department must inform all employees of the order within two days and must demonstrate compliance within a week.

What does this change for growers?

In the short run, county offices and mission-area staff targeted for closure or transfer stay in place through at least Dec. 11. The real test comes when the continuing resolution lapses — if Congress writes clearer language into the next funding bill, the litigation calculus shifts on both sides.