Federal Employees Are Warned Not To Discuss Trump 'Resistance' At Work
Source: New York Times
By Charlie Savage, 3 hrs. ago.
WASHINGTON At workplaces across the United States, it is routine for Americans conversations to turn to President Trump whether his policies are good, whether he should be impeached, what to think about the resistance. Some drink from MAGA mugs; others tape cartoons to their cubicle walls portraying Mr. Trump as a Russian quisling.
But roughly two million people who work for the federal government have now been told that it may be illegal for them to participate in such discussions at work a pronouncement that legal specialists say breaks new ground, and that some criticized as going too far. Generally, federal employees have been free to express opinions about policies and legislative activity at work as long as they do not advocate voting for or against particular candidates in partisan elections.
But in a guidance document distributed on Wednesday, the independent agency that enforces the Hatch Act, a law that bars federal employees from taking part in partisan political campaigns at work or in an official capacity, warned that making or displaying statements at work about impeaching or resisting Mr. Trump is likely to amount to illegal political activity.
The guidance was issued by the Office of Special Counsel, an independent agency that enforces the Hatch Act, including by investigating complaints of improper political activity and recommending discipline like a reprimand or firing for violators. The agency also enforces the Hatch Act against state and local government officials whose salaries come from federal grants. (The agency, led by Henry Kerner, is not related to Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel appointed by the Justice Department). -MORE...
Read more: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/federal-employees-are-warned-not-to-discuss-trump-%e2%80%98resistance%e2%80%99-at-work/ar-BBQh3QR?ocid=HPCOMMDHP15
The reasoning behind the guidance centers on the fact that Mr. Trump is already running for re-election in 2020. It contends that arguments about his policies or impeachment prospects are effectively statements in support or opposition to his campaign.
We understand that the resistance and #resist originally gained prominence shortly after President Trumps election in 2016 and generally related to efforts to oppose administration policies, the guidance said. However, resistance, #resist and similar terms have become inextricably linked with the electoral success (or failure) of the president.
- Speaking in support of or against the resistance to President Trump in a federal workplace would probably be illegal, according to an independent government agency.
Marie Marie
(9,999 posts)Seems to me, the law should work both ways.
bluevoter4life
(784 posts)Can confirm. The Hatch Act specifically prohibits activites for or against a candidate while on government property or time. They crack down as much for Trump as against.
Marie Marie
(9,999 posts)As long as it is fairly enforced.
Cha
(295,899 posts)lastlib
(22,978 posts)Righties go ballistic about "Happy Holidays"; others get upset about "Merry Christmas"--this could be the perfect happy medium!
Cha
(295,899 posts)Farmer-Rick
(10,071 posts)To support a resistance movement is always made illgal by those illegally occupying a government.
bitterross
(4,066 posts)First, let me say, I think Federal workers would be wise to not discuss the President at work anyway. We don't do it where I work because we all have to work together and it's best to not create friction.
Having said that though, avoiding talk of the President is probably darn near impossible to do 100% of the time.
Haggis for Breakfast
(6,831 posts)this is totally illegal. Even federal employees have First Amendment rights that cannot be abridged by the Office of Special Counsel.
We were never permitted to advocate or politicize (We weren't even allowed to wear political buttons during elections.) but this is beyond the reach of OSC to demand, much less enforce.
marble falls
(56,353 posts)marybourg
(12,540 posts)and will be challenged and tossed out.
Response to marybourg (Reply #6)
appalachiablue This message was self-deleted by its author.
sinkingfeeling
(51,274 posts)staff had violated the Hatch Act?
Solly Mack
(90,740 posts)The "formal" announcement for reelection came later (February 2018, I think) but he filed his intent on the same day as the inauguration.
They were briefed at work about it after Trump filed with the FEC.
That's how long it has been going on.
Doitnow
(1,103 posts)participants is a supporter.
50 Shades Of Blue
(9,768 posts)Haggis for Breakfast
(6,831 posts)and makes a sweeping proclamation that will NEVER stand up in court. No surprise there.
I worked for the federal government for years. This is unenforceable, illegal and will not stand up in a court of law. Even federal employees have First Amendment rights that cannot be abridged by the OSC.
DeminPennswoods
(15,246 posts)By way of anectdote, during the Clinton admin, the military at my command were known to be passing around emails denigrating Clinton. They were told from the top to stop and respect the commander-in-chief, but never did. No one was ever punished as far as I knew.
dembotoz
(16,734 posts)Ain't nothing new.
Don't know about enforcement
Ramsey Barner
(349 posts)The Special Counsel, Henry Kerner, previously worked for Cause of Action (formerly the Freedom Through Justice Foundation), which received plenty of dark money from conservative donors and the Koch brothers.
https://osc.gov/Pages/about-bio.aspx?ID=36
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Cause_of_Action
Cause of Action funded negative reporting on ACORN, unions, and the NLRB (created to protect unions).
turbinetree
(24,631 posts)lilactime
(657 posts)knew how much I hated Nixon/Reagan/Bush/Bush. Of course, most of my coworkers hated them too!
I was never shy about expressing my political opinions and the only constraint that was every put upon me was that I was told to remove my Bill Clinton bumper sticker when I parked in the building's courtyard because the only people allowed to have political bumper stickers were Schedule C's (i.e., people who got their jobs via political connections).
Maxheader
(4,366 posts)Another really dumb shit proclamation by the ruskys satellite government..
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,282 posts)Or "Uday and Qusay"?