Background
Career intelligence officers were terminated after executive orders directed the elimination of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility programs. The officers sought a preliminary injunction, arguing the agencies violated their Fifth Amendment due process rights by failing to follow internal regulations regarding reassignment and appeals.
The court’s reasoning
The court held that the Termination Regulation created a legitimate claim of entitlement to reassignment and internal appeal procedures when terminations occur as part of a reduction-in-force. The court found the officers likely to succeed on their due process claims because the agencies deprived them of these specific procedural rights. The court affirmed the preliminary injunction, noting that the agencies could not ignore their own procedures and then use that noncompliance to evade future obligations.
Among the promises of the Fifth Amendment is the requirement that no person be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. This promise of due process has been construed to require federal government agencies to adhere to their own binding regulations.
John Doe v. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 25-1527 (4th Cir. 2026)
The dissent
The preliminary injunction entered in this case is unlawful and should have been promptly vacated.
Niemeyer
What it means going forward
Intelligence agencies must provide career officers facing reduction-in-force terminations with opportunities for reassignment and internal appeals before finalizing their separations.