A coalition of public service organizations and federal unions is suing the Trump administration over its looming plans to strip civil service protections from a broad swath of the career federal workforce.
The group’s newly updated lawsuit — which now includes specific allegations against the Office of Personnel Management’s Feb. 6 final rule — comes just days ahead of President Donald Trump’s anticipated executive order finalizing employee transfers into Schedule Policy/Career.
The revised lawsuit expands on previous legal actions from the nonprofit Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, along with the American Federation of Government Employees, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, and the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). The group filed initial legal action in response to Trump’s day-one executive order, the first step toward restoring the policy previously known as Schedule F.
In practice, the implementation of Schedule Policy/Career would convert career federal employees in “policy-influencing” positions to a new employment classification without long-standing job protections. The move would make it easier for agencies to fire the impacted employees for any reason, without opportunity to appeal adverse actions.
In the lawsuit, the coalition, represented by Democracy Forward, alleges that the Trump administration’s creation of Schedule Policy/Career violates due process rights, exceeds presidential authority and contradicts federal statute. Tim Whitehouse, PEER’s executive director, called OPM’s final rule “profoundly troubling.”
“It would allow political leaders to reach deep into federal agencies to remove and replace unknown and unheralded civil servants whose work is critical to keeping our country safe but whose viewpoints may run afoul of the prevailing political narrative of the day,” Whitehouse said in a press release Wednesday.
The amended lawsuit now asserts that the administration’s final rule does not adequately respond to public comments, engage in “reasoned decision-making,” or appropriately justify the need for a policy change from the Biden administration’s 2024 final rule.
In February, OPM’s final rule provided more details on the planned implementation of Schedule Policy/Career. It also set a 30-day window before Trump would be able to issue an executive order to officially convert the affected employees, expected to occur on or around March 9.
Despite OPM estimating in its regulations that a “modest” 50,000 career federal employees would be converted to Schedule Policy/Career, the plaintiffs argue in their lawsuit that “it is impossible for OPM to know how many positions will actually be moved.”
“OPM has no way to know whether the president will try to strip due process protections from 50,000 federal employees or magnitudes more, but, regardless, this radical change is hardly ‘modest,’” the lawsuit states. “The lack of any limiting principle as to which positions the president can move (both now and in the future) effectively means the entire career civil service is at risk.”
The plaintiffs also describe much of OPM’s evidence in the Schedule Policy/Career final rule as “weak” and misleading. The lawsuit, for instance, points to OPM’s assertion in the final rule stating, “some federal employees … told OPM that policy-resistance ‘is a real thing.’”
But OPM’s evidence for that assertion, the plaintiffs argue, relies solely on one anonymous and vague comment on the proposed regulations.
An OPM spokesperson declined to comment for this story, stating that the agency does not comment on pending litigation.
More broadly, the now-updated lawsuit asserts that the vast majority of the career federal workforce is “entitled to robust civil service protections,” including notice and appeal rights in adverse action cases, as well as due process protections that are afforded under the Constitution.
“Over decades, merit-based selection and retention of employees have produced a stable and successful civil service that effectively carries out the ordinary and continuous work of the federal government and has effectuated the president’s policies and Congress’ programs regardless of political party,” the lawsuit states. “Without talented career employees’ expertise, presidential administrations would be significantly limited in their ability to implement their agendas, and the operations of the federal government — everything from Social Security to national parks — would grind to a halt.”
The lawsuit specifically alleges violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, as well as the Civil Service Reform Act — a 1978 law that established civil service protections for the career federal workforce, with relatively few exceptions. The plaintiffs assert that Schedule Policy/Career unlawfully applies the CSRA’s narrow exceptions regarding job protections to career federal employees, when the exceptions were intended only to apply to political appointees.
“Congress has said, time and again, that career civil servants should be retained based on merit and protected from arbitrary treatment,” the lawsuit states. “The [executive order] and the final rule turn that design on its head.”
If you would like to contact this reporter about recent changes in the federal government, please email drew.friedman@federalnewsnetwork.com or reach out on Signal at drewfriedman.11
Copyright
© 2026 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.
