A coalition of Democratic senators are asking a federal appeals court to overturn a decision they say threatens the foundation of the modern federal workforce, warning that millions of government employees could lose long-standing protections against politically motivated firings.
Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen, joined by Sens. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.) and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), filed an amicus brief in Jackler and Jaroch v. Department of Justice. They urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reverse a Merit Systems Protection Board ruling involving two immigration judges dismissed in 2025. The lawmakers argue the decision could open the door to sweeping changes throughout the federal workforce.
“The Merit Systems Protection Board’s decision was incorrect. Article II does not permit the President to override Congress’s constitutional power to pass laws governing the federal civil service,” the senators wrote. “Upholding the final administrative decision would fundamentally alter the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches. Millions of federal workers would become removable at will— the civil service merit system would functionally cease to exist.”
The case centers on former immigration judges Megan Jackler and Brandon Jaroch, who were removed from their positions without receiving procedural protections established under the Civil Service Reform Act. The MSPB ruled that the attorney general possesses constitutional authority under Article II to remove immigration judges at will, a conclusion the senators contend conflicts with congressional intent and more than a century of civil service law.
The filing is a response to the Trump administration’s broad restructuring of the federal workforce. Diversity, equity and inclusion programs have been dismantled across government agencies. Thousands of federal positions have been reclassified into Schedule Policy/Career jobs that carry fewer employment protections. Agencies including the Departments of Education, Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development have experienced major reductions and reorganizations.
Those changes have drawn intense attention in the D.C. region, where federal employment remains one of the largest drivers of economic stability. More than 162,000 federal employees work in the metropolitan area, representing roughly 41.2% of the workforce. African Americans account for nearly 29% of federal workers in the region, while Black residents make up about 43.4% of the District’s population.
For generations, federal employment offered opportunities that were often unavailable elsewhere. Merit-based hiring, standardized pay scales, pension systems, advancement opportunities and anti-discrimination protections helped create pathways into the middle class for thousands of Black families in Washington, Maryland and Virginia.
The senators devoted much of their filing to the history of the federal civil service system, arguing that Congress deliberately constructed protections to prevent a return to political patronage.
According to the brief, federal employment during much of the 19th century operated under the spoils system, where jobs were awarded based on political loyalty rather than qualifications. The senators cited historical records describing widespread corruption, patronage hiring, bribery and constant turnover whenever administrations changed. Federal workers often remained employed only as long as they retained favor with political leaders.
The filing traces Congress’ response through a series of reforms, including the Pendleton Act of 1883, the Lloyd-LaFollette Act of 1911 and eventually the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Lawmakers wrote that those reforms were intended to create a professional workforce insulated from partisan pressure and arbitrary dismissal.
“Congress acted squarely within its constitutional authority when creating the position of Immigration Judge and placing it under the protection of the Civil Service Reform Act,” the senators wrote. “This is the will of Congress—that Immigration Judges are entitled to the protections of 5 U.S.C. § 7513.”
The brief argues that the dispute is not limited to immigration courts. The senators identified numerous federal occupations whose duties include making official determinations, conducting investigations, evaluating evidence or issuing decisions. Among the positions cited are Customs and Border Protection officers, passport and visa examiners, and agricultural commodity graders. If those types of positions can be classified outside traditional civil service protections, the lawmakers argue, large portions of the federal workforce could become vulnerable to removal without due process safeguards.
The Partnership for Public Service, a nonpartisan organization focused on government management, has warned that the administration’s first year back in office has produced extensive disruption across federal agencies. In its report, A Government in Chaos, the organization described widespread personnel upheaval, leadership turnover and efforts to expand political control over career positions.
Meanwhile, the Washington metropolitan area faces a 6.7% unemployment rate, with Black unemployment approaching 10%, according to regional labor data. Economists and workforce advocates have warned that continued reductions in federal employment could hit communities that have long depended on government service as a source of stable, middle-income jobs.
The senators argue that Congress has repeatedly enacted protections governing federal employment, including civil rights laws, whistleblower protections, merit system principles and restrictions on partisan political activity. They contend that the MSPB ruling threatens to weaken those protections by allowing constitutional claims regarding presidential authority to override statutes enacted by Congress.
“The potential consequence here is that the CSRA is functionally eliminated and federal employees will no longer have protections against arbitrary removal, reprisal, or the assurance of due process,” the senators wrote.
They concluded by urging the court to reverse the decision and reinstate the protections Congress established for federal workers.
“That the president now asserts this authority under Article II does not change the fact that the removals of Jackler and Jaroch are in violation of the CSRA, and accordingly against the will of Congress,” the senators wrote. “Accordingly, amici respectfully ask this Court to reverse the Board’s decision and the removals of Petitioners.”
