A Rule About Accountability That Faced None
The Trump administration finalized a rule Friday that could strip job protections from up to 50,000 federal workers, despite 94% of the more than 40,000 public comments opposing it, according to OPB. The Office of Personnel Management's 255-page directive, titled "Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service," creates a new employment category called Schedule Policy/Career that converts career civil servants into at-will employees who can be fired at the president's discretion. Starting March 9, federal agencies will begin reviewing their workforces to identify which positions to reclassify, OPB reported, though the final number remains unspecified until those reviews conclude.
The mechanism for deciding whose jobs lose protection reveals the concentration of power at stake: agencies identify positions they consider "policy-influencing," OPM recommends which ones qualify, and the president makes the final call, per OPB. This is not a minor procedural adjustment. Currently, around 4,000 political appointees within the federal government can be fired at will, OPB noted. If the 50,000 estimate holds, this rule would expand presidential firing authority over career employees by more than twelvefold. The administration dismissed the overwhelming public opposition as "misunderstandings of existing federal laws and the intentions of the rule," according to OPB.
How the Machine Works
The new category targets senior positions that are "policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating in nature," Al Jazeera reported. But the scope extends further than that language suggests. The 255-page rule document specifies that "policy-influencing positions" would include supervisors of individuals in such positions, according to OPB, meaning the definition cascades down organizational charts in ways that could capture far more employees than the headline category implies. Reclassified employees will no longer be able to file complaints with the Merit Systems Protection Board, the independent agency that has historically adjudicated federal employment disputes, OPB reported. They would theoretically retain the right to file discrimination complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, though OPB noted that the president himself is not subject to federal employment anti-discrimination laws.
The OPM directive states its rationale explicitly: "These positions will remain career jobs filled on a non-partisan basis. Yet they will be at-will positions excepted from adverse action procedures or appeals. This will allow agencies to quickly remove employees from critical positions who engage in misconduct, perform poorly, or obstruct the democratic process by intentionally subverting Presidential directives." The language frames the change as necessary for removing obstructors, but critics note that eliminating the appeals process also removes the mechanism that would document whether someone actually performed poorly or engaged in misconduct.
OPM Director Scott Kupor defended the rule as essential to preventing federal employees from blocking the president's agenda. "People can't be conscientious objectors in the workforce in a way where it interferes with their ability to carry out their mission," Kupor told Al Jazeera. The administration cited reports of federal employees "slow walking" or otherwise obstructing Trump's directives as justification for the change, according to OPB. OPM did not respond to Al Jazeera's request for comment on the rule's specifics.
The Oversight Vacuum
The rule arrives as independent oversight of federal personnel practices has eroded. The Office of Special Counsel, designed to protect whistleblowers and investigate prohibited personnel practices, no longer operates independently since Trump's firing of its Senate-confirmed leader last year, OPB reported. OPM insists that "the vast majority" of those appointed under Schedule Policy/Career will still be protected from prohibited personnel practices including retaliation against whistleblowing, per OPB. But with the independent watchdog compromised and the Merit Systems Protection Board appeals eliminated, the question of who enforces those protections remains unanswered.
The pattern of recent personnel actions provides context for how this authority might be used. Trump fired rank-and-file Justice Department attorneys involved in January 6 prosecutions, according to OPB. More than 300,000 people left the federal government in 2025, Al Jazeera reported, as the White House made aggressive cuts to the federal workforce. Trump has shown willingness to fire career federal employees whom he perceives as political opponents, OPB noted. The rule is aimed in part at "disciplining" federal workers who stand in the way of Trump's policies, per Al Jazeera.
Civil Service Advocates Sound Alarm
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, characterized the rule as an end-run around existing law. "This is a deliberate attempt to do through regulation what the law does not allow," Perryman stated, "strip public servants of their rights and make it easier to fire them for political reasons and harm the American people through doing so." Democracy Forward has filed numerous lawsuits seeking to block the Trump administration's overhaul of the federal government, OPB reported, and the rule already faces multiple legal challenges including one filed by the organization.
Max Stier, president of the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service, framed the stakes in terms of whom the government serves. "Our government needs serious improvements to make it more effective and accountable, but one thing that doesn't need changing is the notion that it exists to serve the American people and not any individual president," Stier said, according to OPB. "This new designation can be used to remove expert career federal employees who place the law and service to the public ahead of blind loyalty and replace them with political supporters who will unquestioningly do the president's bidding."
Five Years in the Making
The rule represents the culmination of an effort that began in Trump's first term. President Trump unveiled a plan in October 2020 to grant himself power to fire vast numbers of civil servants, OPB reported. That plan, known as Schedule F, was blocked and later reversed by the Biden administration. The plan has come to fruition five and a half years later despite vast public opposition, according to OPB. Trump and his team sought to overhaul the federal civil service system at the start of his second term, Al Jazeera reported, arguing that the federal government was bloated and inefficient.
The civil service system the rule dismantles was designed for specific purposes. Under current law, the civil service is meant to be apolitical, OPB noted. The system provides continuity for the government from one presidential administration to another, according to Al Jazeera. The federal government has long been seen as a stable employer, with staff commonly spending decades working at U.S. agencies, Al Jazeera reported. The new rule transforms that relationship for potentially tens of thousands of workers who entered federal service expecting merit-based protections.
The Accountability Paradox
The rule's title promises improved accountability, but the mechanism it creates raises questions about accountability to whom. The Trump administration argued the change is necessary to make the bureaucracy more efficient and accountable, OPB reported. Yet the process that produced the rule itself bypassed the accountability mechanism of public comment: 94% opposed it, and the administration proceeded anyway, dismissing concerns as misunderstandings. The rule eliminates the appeals process that would hold agencies accountable for documenting poor performance before termination. And it concentrates final decision-making authority in the president, who is not subject to federal employment anti-discrimination laws.
If the goal is removing poor performers, the existing civil service system already provides mechanisms for that, though critics have long argued those mechanisms are too slow. If the goal is stopping obstruction of presidential directives, the rule provides no definition of what constitutes obstruction versus legitimate legal or ethical objection. The OPM directive language about "intentionally subverting Presidential directives" could describe a federal employee refusing to carry out an unlawful order, or it could describe someone slow-walking paperwork. The rule provides no mechanism for distinguishing between the two.
What Happens Next
Federal agencies now have 120 days to complete workforce reviews and identify positions for potential reclassification. The timeline means employees will spend months uncertain whether their jobs will retain civil service protections. Multiple lawsuits are already challenging the rule's legality, with Democracy Forward and others arguing it violates civil service laws that Congress enacted specifically to prevent political manipulation of the federal workforce. The courts will ultimately determine whether the administration can accomplish through regulation what critics say the law prohibits.
For the estimated 50,000 federal workers who may be affected, the March 9 effective date begins a period of uncertainty that could last months. They will continue performing jobs that influence policy, supervise others who influence policy, or fall into the expanding definition of "policy-influencing" that the 255-page rule establishes. They will do so knowing that the appeals process that once protected them from arbitrary termination no longer applies, that the independent watchdog office no longer operates independently, and that the president who will make final decisions about their job classifications has already demonstrated willingness to fire career employees he perceives as opponents. The question the rule poses is not whether federal workers should be accountable. It is whether accountability flows in one direction only.