In Danziger et al. v. U.S., No. 25-cv-1241 (Fed. Cl. Apr. 10, 2026) (a Crowell & Moring case), the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) denied the government’s motion to dismiss a complaint seeking breach of contract damages for improper terminations in bad faith and/or abuse of discretion. The case involves hundreds of contractors for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), who were terminated in 2025 in connection with the dismantling of USAID. The government sought to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim, arguing that the complaint failed to sufficiently plead bad faith or abuse of discretion. The court rejected these arguments, noting that the complaint was “replete with allegations implicating bad faith,” and specifically rejected the “peculiar notion” “that governmental misconduct is immunized when a contracting officer acts pursuant to directives from higher-ranking officials.” The court also held that the government’s payment of certain termination costs was no defense to the contractors’ breach claim and confirmed that an improper termination for convenience entitles contractors to termination costs as well as breach damages.
International Development
Trending Now
Small Business Set-Asides in FY 2026: What the Data Signals for What Comes Next • Ending Discrimination in Government Contracting Act Proposes to Eliminate Preferences for 8(a) and WOSB Firms • Counsel Commentary: GSA Rolls Out New Standard AI Clause • Fixed-Price Contracting Works. But Not If the Government Outsources Ambiguity • Other Transaction Authority Agreements: Practical Guidance for Government Contractors
COFC Holds that USAID Contractors Properly Pleaded Breach of Contract by Improper Mass Termination in Bad Faith/Abuse of Discretion
Mark Van Scyoc | Shutterstock
Stay ahead in international development contracting with daily updates on USAID, global procurement, and foreign assistance with our Development newsletter, delivering up-to-the-minute intelligence Monday–Saturday — Subscribe here.