Supreme Court won’t halt judge’s probe into civil service laws’ virility, for now

The Supreme Court on Friday declined to block a federal district court from investigating whether President Trump has effectively neutered key civil service laws, though it left the door open to reconsidering that decision in the future.

Since President Trump’s first term, the National Association of Immigration Judges have fought the imposition of a "gag rule” that has prevented immigration judges from speaking or writing publicly in their personal capacities, first issued in 2017. The union sued the Justice Department in 2020 over the rule, but that case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in 2023 after a judge found that the judges were required to first seek redress from the Merit Systems Protection Board.

But in June, a three-judge panel on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals revived the case, instructing the lower judge to conduct an investigation into whether the Trump administration’s move to fire political leaders at independent agencies like the MSPB and U.S. Office of Special Counsel have caused the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act’s administrative review scheme to become “so undermined” as to deny federal workers meaningful review. Separately, Trump in February signed an executive order stipulating that all executive branch agencies adopt the president and Attorney General Pam Bondi’s “interpretation of the law.”

Federal employees seeking to challenge an adverse personnel action are typically required to seek redress before the MSPB before turning to the federal courts. But if a judge found that the MSPB no longer allowed for “meaningful review” of a personnel action, under Thunder Basin Coal Co. v. Reich they could potentially bypass that process and sue the government directly.

The Trump administration earlier this month asked the Supreme Court step in and stop the lower court’s discovery order, arguing that questions regarding the current makeup at MSPB aren’t material to the gag rule case and that the investigation would “wreak havoc” on the federal civil service.

“Nothing in the CSRA’s text or structure supports an evolving exception based on whether the MSPB is operating adequately and efficiently,” wrote U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer.

But in a brief, unsigned order, the Supreme Court on Friday denied the White House’s request, ostensibly allowing the district judge’s investigation to commence. But the order, which had no public dissenters, left the door open to reconsidering that decision if the factfinding endeavor begins before the justices can consider an as-yet unfiled formal appeal from the administration.

“At this stage, the government has not demonstrated that it will suffer irreparable harm without a stay,” the court wrote. “This denial is without prejudice to a reapplication if the district court commences discovery proceedings before the disposition of the government’s forthcoming petition for a writ of certiorari.”