Can the MSPB Stay Independent? A Private White House Meeting and a Broken Precedent Raise the Question
The Merit Systems Protection Board — the independent body federal employees count on when they're fired — may have made its most consequential ruling in decades after a private meeting with White House officials. The New York Times reported on it this weekend. The full Federal Circuit has now agreed to review it.
What the MSPB Is and Why It Matters
The Merit Systems Protection Board was created by the Civil Service Reform Act — the post-Watergate law designed to ensure federal jobs are governed by merit, not political loyalty. When a federal employee is removed, suspended, or demoted, the MSPB is the independent referee they turn to. After the mass firings that began in early 2025, federal employees flooded the board as a last resort.
What the New York Times Reported
According to the Times, last November the board's acting chair met with White House officials at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. Colleagues say he came out of that meeting shaken. Days later, the board's direction shifted.
The White House's account is that the meeting was a job interview for the permanent chair position, and that the acting chair was "not being told how to rule." But the Times reported that White House officials made clear during the meeting that they believed the board was bound to follow the Justice Department's opinion on the scope of the President's removal power.
In March — for the first time in its history — the MSPB embraced exactly that argument. The ruling, taken to its logical conclusion, would mean the President can remove career federal employees without due process and without the board providing any meaningful check on that power. As one law professor put it: knowing the decision was made with influence from the White House means it was not based on positions of law.
Why the Federal Circuit's Move Is Significant
The full Federal Circuit has now agreed to review that ruling — a rare step that signals just how consequential the court views this decision. A full-court review, rather than a standard three-judge panel, is reserved for matters that present novel or particularly weighty legal questions. The Civil Service Reform Act and the constitutional status of independent agency adjudication are both on the table.
The MSPB was explicitly designed to prevent what the Times described: a private push on an independent adjudicatory body is little different from calling a federal judge and telling him how to rule.
What This Means If You Have a Pending Case
If you have an appeal pending before the MSPB right now — or a removal you are actively fighting — this does not mean your case is over. But you should treat the ground as unstable and act accordingly.
Document everything. Save every removal notice, every suspension letter, every email with a date. Write down what happened and when. If anything in your removal connects to protected activity — retaliation for whistleblowing, EEO activity, a protected characteristic, or prior protected disclosures — document that connection explicitly and preserve the evidence.
Cases that carry those elements are where civil service protections remain strongest, regardless of the MSPB's current posture. That is the work attorneys for federal employees handle every day, and Southworth PC offers free consultations.
Legal Disclaimer: This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Federal employment situations are fact-specific and time-sensitive. Please consult a qualified federal employment attorney about your specific situation.