Court: Trump cannot dismiss civil service board member freely

WASHINGTON – A federal judge has determined that former President Donald Trump did not possess the legal authority to remove a board member responsible for safeguarding federal employees from political retaliation, which included protections for whistleblowers. This decision emerged after Cathy Harris, a member of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) who was appointed by President Joe Biden, initiated legal action following an attempt by the White House to terminate her position.

U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras declared that Trump’s endeavor to dismiss Harris from the board was not within his rights because it lacked the necessary grounds such as inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office, which are stipulated for such removals. Contreras highlighted that Harris faced a significant infringement on her independence and role due to the improper dismissal attempt.

Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Contreras initially supported Harris by issuing a temporary restraining order on February 18, allowing her to continue leading the three-member board until the court’s decision. Following a subsequent hearing, a permanent injunction was granted to solidify this provisional order.

Harris, who began chairing the board after her appointment in 2022, was informed last month about her impending termination despite her term slated to end in March 2028. At the same time, another board member, Raymond Limon, opted for retirement. According to Harris’ legal representatives, the dismissal announcement stated none of the justifications required by Congress for the president to remove board members, which are inefficiency, neglect, or malfeasance.

Harris’ attorneys emphasized in their court submissions that this case does not fall into the category of complex constitutional issues. They underscored the clarity of the legal position relevant to the case, implying that Trump’s actions lacked a legal foundation.

On the other side, government attorneys contended that Judge Contreras lacked jurisdiction to reinstate Harris or restrict Trump’s ability to appoint a new member to the board. They argued that Trump’s decision to remove Harris aligned with the interests of the American people and should be acknowledged given his elected responsibility to manage the executive branch.

Amid recent executive directives from Trump regarding federal employment, the board has seen an increase in appeal cases, with an annual issuance of roughly 5,000 decisions by its judges. Harris’ legal team emphasized the necessity of maintaining the board’s impartiality to ensure trust among civil servants, judiciary, and the general public in its capacity to function independently from undue pressure or bias.

The current structure of the board requires presidential nominations and Senate confirmations for its three members, who serve for seven-year terms. Political party representation on the board is balanced, as no more than two members can be from the same party.