Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Bd.
- Decided
- June 23, 2017
- Docket
- 16–399.
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 4,620 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that federal district court is the proper forum for review of mixed cases from the Board — McMillin v. DVA (2023)
- holding that the affirmative defense of retaliation for prior EEO activity “falls outside [of the court’s] jurisdic- tional reach” — Thomas v. DVA (2024)
- holding that the affirmative defense of re- taliation for prior equal employment opportunity activity “falls outside [of the court’s] jurisdictional reach” — In Re AKERMAN (2024)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Justice GINSBURG delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case concerns the proper forum for judicial review when a federal employee complains of a serious adverse employment action taken against him, one falling within the compass of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA), 5 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq., and attributes the action, in whole or in part, to bias based on race, gender, age, or disability, in violation of federal antidiscrimination laws. We refer to complaints of that order, descriptively, as "mixed cases."
In the CSRA, Congress created the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB or Board) to review certain serious personnel actions against federal employees. If an employee asserts rights under the CSRA only, MSPB decisions, all agree, are subject to judicial review exclusively in the Federal Circuit. § 7703(b)(1). If the employee asserts no civil-service rights, invoking only federal antidiscrimination law, the proper forum for judicial review, again all agree, is a federal district court, see Kloeckner v. Solis, 568 U.S. 41 , 46, 133 S.Ct. 596 , 184 L.Ed.2d 433 (2012) ; the Federal Circuit, while empowered to review MSPB decisions on civil-service claims, § 7703(b)(1)(A), lacks authority over claims arising under antidiscrimination laws, see § 7703(c).
Statutes cited
Cite this
Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Bd., 582 U.S. 420 (2017)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.