Policy Career Service Act of 2026

Constitutional concerns with the original

1. The President lacks unilateral authority to reclassify positions from competitive to excepted service without statutory authorization; such reclassification affects the civil service framework established by Congress under Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 (Necessary and Proper Clause) and the Pendleton Act framework.
2. The order may abridge due process and property interests of career employees under the Fifth Amendment by removing procedural protections without legislative grounding.
3. The order may violate the separation of powers by encroaching on Congress's authority to structure the federal workforce.

Solution text

Operative provisions

Bipartisan rationale

Democrats gain explicit statutory protections for career employees (retained MSPB appeal rights, 'for cause' removal standard, 5% cap, 120-day notice) and a clear legislative framework that prevents unilateral executive action. Republicans gain a legitimate excepted service category for policy roles, reducing procedural barriers to managing political appointees, while preserving institutional integrity by requiring congressional authorization. Both parties benefit from avoiding constitutional confrontation and ensuring the civil service is structured by statute, not executive fiat.

Constitutional citations

• → Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 (Necessary and Proper Clause)
• → Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause
• → Article II, Section 3 (Take Care Clause)

Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 Amendment V Article II, Section 3