President Donald Trump has asked more than two million federal employees to consider resigning. If they leave their jobs by the end of the month, they’ve been promised full paychecks and retention of their benefits through the end of September. Employees who stay on will be held to “Enhanced standards of conduct.”
Sounds nice. But it’s not a plan to make the government more efficient.
The enhanced standards state “Employees who engage in unlawful behavior or other misconduct will be prioritized for appropriate investigation and discipline, including termination.”
But unlawful behavior in a Trump administration in an oxymoron. He’s convicted felon who was also indicted for attempting to overthrow the elected government in 2020. And he pardoned the people who tried to help him do it.
That indictment and another are the reason he fired federal prosecutors in the Department of Justice (DOJ) and some of the highest career officials in the FBI. The remaining FBI leadership was asked to compile a list of all the agents who were involved in investigations of the Jan. 6 insurrection.
Now I’m not saying all career DOJ prosecutors and FBI officials are equally dedicated to serving the country. But based on the success rate in obtaining indictments and convictions, the people he fired and are threatening to fire are “guilty” of doing too good of a job.
That purge is just one part of Trump’s plan to the dismantle the deep state — a fictional part of the federal workforce that’s supposedly intent on thwarting his agenda. He’s really targeting employees who are protected by the First Amendment right to disagree with what he says or does — as long as it doesn’t interfere with their job performance.
That’s a lesson Gov. Mike Dunleavy learned from two lawsuits he lost after firing two psychiatrists at the Alaska Psychiatric Institute and an attorney who worked for the Department of Law. In 2018, he informed hundreds of “at-will” employees that in order to keep their jobs, they had to sign what a federal judge described as an “ostensible pledge of support” for his agenda. It also served as “a warning against political dissention in the state workforce” that “would be expected to chill employees’ political affiliations and activities” outside of work.
But whereas Dunleavy actually had a political agenda when he took office, for Trump it’s all personal.
The DOJ and FBI firings are obviously about settling scores with anyone involved in investigating the insurrection.
There are also reports that administration officials are asking career civil servants in the White House National Security Council who they voted for and what political contributions they made. The message that sends to all federal employees is they better refrain from publicly criticizing Trump or supporting anybody who opposes him.
These arguments are likely to show up in a lawsuit filed by federal employees’ unions. They called the buyout plan an “arbitrary, unlawful, short-fused ultimatum.” A federal judge put a hold on the Feb. 6 deadline for employees to accept it and scheduled hearing for next week.
In another lawsuit, seven FBI agents and the FBI Agent’s Association accuses the administration of “unlawful, intimidating, and threatening behavior” in response to them “executing lawful search and arrest warrants and participating in lawful investigations of crimes committed by Jan. 6 perpetrators.” They correctly argue the administration has no “discretion to recast” their work “as illegal.”
Both cases should move through the system quicker than most. The real test will come when, not if, Trump loses.
He could appeal. Or he could violate the law by ignoring the rulings. Especially since the Supreme Court granted presidents “at least presumptive immunity from prosecution.” And congressional Republicans won’t challenge him.
Then he might follow advice once offered by Vice President JD Vance. Fire everyone and “replace them with our people.”
It’s unlikely they’d take it to that extreme. But if he gets away with adding a political litmus test for new civil service hires, every state may modify their laws. And if it becomes part of the criteria for hiring detectives and prosecutors, our First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights may no longer provide guaranteed protection for any private citizen willing to speak out against the people and party in power.
• Rich Moniak is a Juneau resident and retired civil engineer with more than 25 years of experience working in the public sector. Columns, My Turns and Letters to the Editor represent the view of the author, not the view of the Juneau Empire. Have something to say? Here’s how to submit a My Turn or letter.
