A coalition of federal employee unions and advocacy groups has filed an amended complaint in federal court this week, seeking to block the Trump administration’s implementation of “Schedule Policy/Career,” a reclassification that could strip civil service protections from tens of thousands of career federal workers.
The lawsuit, originally filed in January 2025, was updated on March 5, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for Maryland before Judge Paula Xinis. Plaintiffs, including the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), AFL-CIO, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), and Democracy Forward, argue that the policy exceeds presidential authority, violates the Civil Service Reform Act, denies due process under the Constitution, and contravenes the Administrative Procedure Act through arbitrary rulemaking.
Schedule Policy/Career, revived via Executive Order 14171 on President Trump’s first day in office in January 2025, renames and reinstates the 2020 Schedule F proposal. It targets “confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating” positions, moving them to excepted service status. This would make affected employees effectively at-will, eliminating standard removal protections, appeal rights to the Merit Systems Protection Board, and other safeguards. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) estimates around 50,000 employees could be reclassified, though earlier projections were higher.
OPM’s final rule, published February 6, 2026, triggered a 30-day window for President Trump to issue an executive order converting specific positions. Reports indicate conversions could begin as early as March 9, 2026, potentially affecting roles across agencies involved in policy development.
The federal employee unions contend the broad application conflicts with congressional intent to reserve such exemptions for political appointees (like Schedule C). They criticize OPM’s evidence as weak and misleading, claiming the rule ignores extensive public opposition during rulemaking and risks politicizing the nonpartisan civil service. Union leaders warn it could enable retaliation, cronyism, and the replacement of experienced experts with politically aligned hires, undermining government operations in areas like environmental regulation and public health.
The administration maintains that the change restores accountability for poor performance in policy-influencing roles, describing existing protections as barriers to effective governance. OPM has provided implementation guidance emphasizing merit-based hiring and protections against prohibited practices like political discrimination.
The case remains pending, with plaintiffs due to respond by March 13, 2026, to a government motion to dismiss filed earlier. Separate challenges from other federal employee unions, including from the National Treasury Employees Union, continue in other courts. Broader opposition includes proposed legislation to preserve civil service rules.
For federal employees potentially impacted by these changes, professional guidance can help navigate options. Speak with a Federal Retirement Consultant (FRC®) today to review your situation and explore tailored strategies.
