U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC)  Now Says Agencies Can Fire Probationary Feds For Almost Any Reason

In a significant policy shift, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has informed over 2,000 probationary federal employees that it will not pursue their wrongful termination complaints, stating it lacks the authority to challenge these firings. This decision marks a reversal from the previous stance under former OSC head Hampton Dellinger, who had argued that such dismissals might be illegal under federal reduction-in-force rules and had called for a pause in terminations .WSJ+3The Washington Post+3POLITICO+3

The controversy centers on the Trump administration’s efforts to downsize the federal workforce, particularly targeting probationary employees—those within their first year of service or in new positions requiring a trial period. In January and February 2025, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued memos directing agencies to terminate probationary employees by specific dates. However, U.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled that OPM had overstepped its legal authority, stating that no statute grants OPM the power to direct terminations in other agencies. Consequently, OPM rescinded the memos and revised its guidance, emphasizing that probationary periods should assess whether an employee will be an asset to the government, aligning with the President’s directive to reduce the federal workforce .The Washington Post+2AP News+2The Guardian+2Federal News Network+7WSKG+7Business Insider+7Wyoming Public Media+7NPR+7opb+7

Despite these developments, the OSC’s recent decision not to investigate the mass firings has raised concerns among Democratic lawmakers and legal advocates about the politicization of the agency, which is meant to protect federal employees from discrimination and retaliation. Critics argue that the OSC is abdicating its duty to investigate potential unlawful practices, suggesting that the dismissals stem from the Trump administration’s broader strategy to downsize federal employment rather than individual performance issues .The Washington Post

The situation has left many federal workers in limbo, with some agencies, like the National Science Foundation, reinstating fired employees based on updated guidance from OPM and federal courts. However, the broader implications for civil service protections and the integrity of oversight institutions remain a topic of intense debate and legal scrutiny .Wyoming Public Media+7NPR+7opb+7The Washington Post

Is it Legal For President Trump to Accept a Luxury Boeing 747-8 Jet From Qatar?

The legality of former President Donald Trump accepting a luxury Boeing 747-8 jet from Qatar is under intense scrutiny, primarily due to the U.S. Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause. The Daily Beast+10Business Insider+10Time+10

 What Is the Foreign Emoluments Clause?

Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution, known as the Foreign Emoluments Clause, prohibits federal officials from accepting gifts, payments, or titles from foreign governments without the consent of Congress. This provision aims to prevent undue foreign influence and conflicts of interest. Wikipedia

The Proposed Jet Transfer

Reports indicate that the Qatari royal family plans to gift a $400 million Boeing 747-8 jet to the U.S. Department of Defense for use as Air Force One during Trump’s presidency. Subsequently, the jet would be transferred to the Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Foundation after his term ends. The aircraft, previously used by Qatar’s royal family, is lavishly outfitted with lounges, bedrooms, and other luxury amenities .The Daily Beast+15MySA+15New York Post+15news+9Vanity Fair+9ABC News+9Wikipedia

Legal and Ethical Concerns

Ethics experts argue that this arrangement may violate the Emoluments Clause, as it involves a valuable gift from a foreign government that could benefit Trump personally. Even though the initial recipient is the Department of Defense, the eventual transfer to Trump’s presidential library raises questions about personal gain and potential conflicts of interest .WSJ+11Time+11news+11

The Department of Justice has reportedly stated that the gift does not constitute bribery, as it is not tied to any specific service or favor. However, critics contend that the appearance of impropriety and the potential for personal benefit to Trump remain problematic .Mediaite

Congressional Approval and Precedents

Historically, U.S. presidents have sought congressional approval before accepting gifts from foreign governments. Without such approval, accepting the jet could set a concerning precedent and potentially violate constitutional provisions. Some lawmakers have expressed the need for a thorough legal review and possible congressional action to address the situation .New York Post+3news+3Time+3New York Post

Conclusion

While the proposed gift is framed as a donation to the U.S. government, the eventual benefit to Trump’s presidential library and potential personal use raises significant legal and ethical questions. The situation underscores the importance of adhering to constitutional safeguards designed to prevent foreign influence and maintain the integrity of public office.