The Merit Systems Protection Board last week issued a sweeping new decision that could upend how—and if—some federal workers appeal their termination, ruling that the attorney general has constitutional authority to fire immigration judges at-will.
The case stemmed from the 2025 firings of two immigration judges—Megan Jackler and Brandon Jaroch—in which the Justice Department cited Article II of the Constitution as the sole basis for their removal. An administrative law judge overturned both employees’ removals, at which point both Justice and the Office of Personnel Management appealed those decisions to the full MSPB.
Though most of the MSPB’s analysis hinged upon whether immigration judges are considered ”inferior officers,” for whom removal protections were ruled unconstitutional under the Seila Law v. Securities and Exchange Commission Supreme Court decision, it also creates a new avenue by which agencies can assert constitutional authority to argue that the board lacks jurisdiction to review certain firings.
“The agency does not contend that Article II of the Constitution renders [Title 5] section 7513 removal protections invalid as a matter of law or in all circumstances,” the MSPB’s two Republican members wrote. “The agency argues only that the removal protection provisions cannot be constitutionally applied to the appellants, whom the agency argues are inferior officers under the Constitution, because doing so would impinge on the president’s authority under...
A bitter legal battle at JPMorgan Chase has taken another dramatic turn after executive Lorna Hajdini filed a defamation lawsuit against former banker Chirayu Rana, accusing him of making up false...