Protecting Agency Independence: Fired MSPB Chair Calls for Judicial Review of Dismissal

Cathy Harris, the former chair of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), isn’t backing down after being abruptly fired. She’s now taking her case to the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, arguing that her removal by President Trump was illegal and could set a dangerous precedent for federal worker protections.

What Is the Merit Systems Protection Board?

The MSPB isn’t exactly a household name, but it plays a crucial role in making sure federal employees are treated fairly. It acts as a watchdog, ensuring that hiring and firing decisions in government jobs are based on merit, not politics or favoritism.

The board consists of three members, each serving staggered seven-year terms. This structure is meant to keep the board independent, shielding it from political interference. That’s exactly why Harris believes her firing was unlawful.

How Did Cathy Harris Get Fired?

Harris, a Biden appointee, had been leading the MSPB as chairwoman when, in February 2025, she got a sudden and unexpected message from the White House: She was out. There was no warning, no explanation—just an immediate dismissal.

Believing this violated federal law, Harris quickly challenged the decision in court. Her argument was simple: Board members like her can only be fired for specific reasons, like neglecting their duties or engaging in misconduct. Since none of that applied, she argued that her firing was illegal.

The Initial Court Ruling in Harris’s Favor

In March 2025, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras ruled in her favor. He made it clear that the law doesn’t allow the president to fire an MSPB board member without cause. His decision reinstated Harris to her position, stating, “The President thus lacks the power to remove Harris from office at will.”

But the legal battle wasn’t over. The Justice Department quickly appealed, arguing that the ruling interfered with presidential authority.

Appeals Court Overturns the Ruling

A three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard the case next. In a split 2-1 decision, they ruled against Harris, reversing the lower court’s ruling. The majority opinion sided with the White House, arguing that presidents have broad power to remove government officials, even in independent agencies like the MSPB.

This decision raised concerns about whether the MSPB and similar agencies could truly remain independent if presidents could remove their leaders at will. Some legal experts fear it could open the door to more politically motivated firings in the future.

Harris Refuses to Back Down

Now, Harris is asking the full D.C. Circuit Court to reconsider the case. She’s making a passionate plea for an en banc review, which means all judges on the court—not just a three-judge panel—would weigh in on the matter.

“We should not let this aberrational result stand,” Harris said, warning that if the ruling isn’t overturned, it could weaken job protections for federal workers and make independent agencies more vulnerable to political interference.

What’s at Stake?

Harris’s case is about more than just her job. The final outcome could reshape how independent government agencies operate and whether their leaders can be fired on a whim.

For decades, the MSPB has ensured that federal jobs are awarded based on qualifications—not political loyalty. If the current ruling stands, future presidents could have greater influence over hiring and firing within these agencies, potentially eroding the merit-based system.

Legal experts say this case could end up before the U.S. Supreme Court, where justices would have to clarify how much power the president has over independent agencies.

The Bigger Picture

This legal battle highlights a growing debate about the balance of power between the White House and independent agencies. If Harris loses her fight, it could make it easier for future administrations—regardless of political party—to remove agency officials for political reasons rather than performance-related ones.

For now, all eyes are on the D.C. Circuit Court to see if they’ll grant Harris the full review she’s asking for. The decision could have lasting implications for federal workers, government accountability, and the independence of agencies designed to serve the public interest.