The following is from Judicial Watch.

Judicial Watch announced it has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the US Agency for International Development (USAID) for records regarding waste, fraud, and abuse tied to aid money sent to Ukraine (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Agency for International Development (No. 1:25-cv-00508)). 

Judicial Watch’s FOIA requests include demands for records of USAID’s then-Administrator Samantha Power and others regarding:

1. Any reported allegations of sexual exploitation, abuse, or trafficking of migrants fleeing Ukraine and/or receiving assistance from USAID inside Ukraine.
2. Any third-party monitoring contractors or NGOs reporting potential fraud associated with USAID aid to Ukraine.
3. Any reported allegations of Direct Cash Assistance Program fraud or attempts to conduct cash transactions in Russian rubles associated with USAID aid to Ukraine.
4. Any USAID-branded commodities appearing for sale in open markets or outside of response activities in Ukraine.

USAID never responded to Judicial Watch’s FOIA requests, citing “unusual circumstances.”

In December 2023, the agency’s Inspector General’s Office issued a fraud warning , citing conflicts of interest in USAID’s Ukraine response, including:

Example 1:

• Missing conflict of interest policy. A USAID prime awardee discovered that an employee of a subawardee was also a registered beneficiary of the same program and tasked with confirming beneficiary eligibility. The prime awardee reported the issue to the Office of Inspector General (OIG), which determined that the subawardee lacked a conflict of interest policy to prevent such situations.

Example 2:

• Unreported personal relationships between procurement staff and bidders. A USAID prime awardee found that a subawardee’s procurement official had an unreported relationship with a bidder. The bidder was disqualified, and the official was retrained.

Example 3:

• Awardee employee working for a subawardee. A USAID prime awardee identified an employee responsible for quality control of a subawardee who was also employed by the subawardee itself, creating a conflict of interest. The employee was removed from contact with the subawardee, and a written warning was issued.

A February 13, 2025, USAID Inspector General’s report found that the agency failed to properly vet humanitarian groups it funded to prevent sexual abuse of Ukrainian war victims.

The report referenced a 2022 United Nations finding that approximately 90% of the 6.5 million people who fled Ukraine were women and children, putting them at high risk for sexual exploitation, abuse, human trafficking, and forced prostitution.

“In July 2022, we issued an advisory notice highlighting key considerations for USAID’s developing humanitarian response, including risks of sexual exploitation and abuse. However, more than a year later, we had not received any allegations, raising concerns that cases were underreported.”

On January 20, 2025, President Trump ordered a 90-day pause in U.S. foreign development assistance to assess program efficiencies and alignment with U.S. foreign policy.

In a January 2025 exit memo, USAID stated that it had sent nearly $35 billion to Ukraine since the Russian invasion began in February 2022.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton criticized USAID’s handling of taxpayer money.

“The American people deserve an immediate and full accounting of the billions of dollars that the Biden USAID sent to Ukraine. USAID is a notoriously corrupt agency, and we hope the Trump administration, through this lawsuit, brings transparency on this key issue.”

Judicial Watch has several ongoing FOIA lawsuits regarding Ukraine.

In December 2020, Judicial Watch uncovered State Department records showing that US officials in Ukraine were aware of potential corruption involving Burisma Holdings and the Biden family’s connections. Additionally, records revealed that Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko was offered high-level access to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign by the same firm that represented Burisma.

Judicial Watch has also sued for records regarding a 2016 White House meeting that included Ukrainian prosecutors, embassy officials, and CIA employee Eric Ciaramella, who was widely reported as the whistleblower behind Trump’s first impeachment.

For the full press release, click here.

Read Judicial Watch’s lawsuit against USAID here or below.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.,
425 Third Street S.W., Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20024
Plaintiff

v.

U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (USAID),
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20534
Defendant

Civil Action No.: 1:25-cv-00508

COMPLAINT

1. Plaintiff Judicial Watch, Inc. brings this action against the U.S. Agency for International Development to compel compliance with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
3. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e).

PARTIES

4. Plaintiff Judicial Watch, Inc. is a not-for-profit, educational organization incorporated under the laws of the District of Columbia and headquartered in Washington, D.C. The organization seeks to promote transparency, integrity, and accountability in government and fidelity to the rule of law.
5. Defendant USAID is a U.S. government agency headquartered in Washington, D.C., and has custody of the records sought by Judicial Watch under FOIA.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

First FOIA Request

6. On December 15, 2022, Judicial Watch submitted a FOIA request to USAID seeking:
   • Records or communications from USAID officials regarding:
     1. Allegations of sexual exploitation, abuse, or trafficking involving migrants fleeing Ukraine.
     2. Reports of potential fraud associated with USAID aid to Ukraine.
     3. Allegations of fraud in the Direct Cash Assistance Program or transactions in Russian rubles.
     4. USAID-branded commodities appearing for sale outside of response activities in Ukraine.
   • The request covered records from March 1, 2022, to the present.
7. USAID acknowledged receipt of the request on December 15, 2022, assigning it reference number F-00043-23, citing “unusual circumstances” to justify a delay.

Second FOIA Request

8. On June 8, 2023, Judicial Watch submitted a second FOIA request seeking:
   • USAID Contracting Office records related to Ukraine aid programs, including contracts, task orders, grants, purchase orders, and other communications.
   • Emails, text messages, or communications of USAID officials regarding:
     1. Tracing assets of individuals connected to the war effort in Ukraine.
     2. Illegal diversion of USAID aid to Ukraine.
     3. USAID commodities being sold on the black market.
     4. Reports of fraud, corruption, human rights violations, or illicit sex trafficking related to USAID operations in Ukraine.
   • The request covered records from February 1, 2017, to the present.
9. USAID acknowledged receipt of this request on June 8, 2023, assigning it reference number F-00188-23 and again citing “unusual circumstances” for a delay.
10. As of the date of this complaint, USAID has failed to:

• Determine whether to comply with the requests.
• Notify Judicial Watch of any determinations.
• Advise on the right to appeal any adverse determinations.
• Produce the requested records or claim any FOIA exemptions.

COUNT I – Violation of FOIA (5 U.S.C. § 552)

11. Judicial Watch reasserts the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 10.
12. USAID is in violation of FOIA by failing to process and provide records as required by law.
13. Judicial Watch is suffering irreparable harm due to USAID’s failure to comply with FOIA.
14. Judicial Watch has exhausted all administrative remedies.

RELIEF REQUESTED

Judicial Watch respectfully requests that the Court:

1. Order USAID to conduct a reasonable search for all requested records.
2. Order USAID to produce all non-exempt records and provide a Vaughn index for any withheld materials.
3. Enjoin USAID from withholding non-exempt records.
4. Award attorneys’ fees and litigation costs to Judicial Watch.
5. Grant any further relief deemed just and proper.

Dated: February 20, 2025

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ James F. Peterson
James F. Peterson
D.C. Bar No. 450171
Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 Third Street SW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20024

Attorney for Plaintiff