Backlash as federal workers warned not to discuss Trump impeachment
Unions and free speech advocates say official advice on expressing political opinions at work overly restricts dissent
New guidance warning federal workers not to discuss Donald Trump’s potential impeachment or the so-called “resistance” movement has sparked controversy, with some ethics advocates voicing concerns over what they see as an effort to crack down on free speech and limit dissent.
A memo released by the Office of Special Counsel last week clarified what constitutes political activity at the federal workplace, stemming from Trump seeking re-election as president in 2020.
In addition to avoiding topics that might suggest views favorable or unfavorable toward Trump, the document stipulated “strong criticism or praise of a presidential administration’s policies and actions” also amount to political activity.
The move prompted immediate backlash from government watchdogs and unions, who said the interpretation of political activity is too broad and exposes more than 2 million federal employees to undue risk and could hurt their free speech rights.
“This guidance is a broad reach that employees may find confusing. It could unnecessarily have a chilling effect on employees’ first amendment free speech,” said Tony Reardon, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, which represents 150,000 federal employees in 33 departments and agencies.
At issue is the Hatch Act, a law dating back nearly eight decades that was designed to prevent federal employees from engaging in partisan politics at work or while in their official capacity as civil servants. The law has long been enforced by the OSC, an independent federal agency unrelated to special counsel Robert Mueller and the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The office typically investigates complaints against employees accused of engaging in partisan activity at work, and can recommend disciplinary measures that could result in dismissal.
Faced with criticism that its definition of political activity was too far-reaching, the OSC insisted there had been no substantive changes in how such scrutiny was being applied.
The guidelines did not bar employees entirely from discussing what presidential conduct may warrant impeachment or sharing their thoughts on the matter, the office said. It noted that what would instead be inappropriate would be to advocate for – or against – the president’s impeachment while in the workplace.
The reason behind the memo’s release, according to the OSC, were questions that arose from federal employees and ethics officers given the frequency of such conversations – particularly at a time when Trump would clearly be seeking re-election. In addition to impeachment and the idea of “resisting” Trump, the OSC noted that federal employees were prohibited from wearing, displaying or distributing items from Trump’s campaign, such as anything bearing his Make America Great Again slogan.
Government watchdogs nonetheless saw a power grab; some made the case that talk of impeachment was not inherently linked to Trump’s re-election prospects, but instead a separate matter having to do with grounds for removal from office.
“The OSC needs to stand down and recognize that the Hatch Act permits advocacy for and against Trump’s impeachment,” Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University who served as a government ethics lawyer in the DC attorney general’s Office, wrote in an op-ed this week.
Others took issue with the notion that federal employees could not stake out a position for or against administration policy, which they said ignored the fact that some issues transcended politics.