One federal employee said in a court filing that they “cannot in good conscience pretend to agree with President Trump’s policies.”
Government employees asked a federal judge Wednesday to block the Trump administration from encouraging job applicants to demonstrate their loyalty to the president’s agenda.
In a lawsuit filed earlier this month, a group of federal labor unions argues that the White House’s “merit hiring plan” violates applicants’ First Amendment rights. The plan, put forth by the Office of Personnel Management, includes the following short essay question:
“How would you help advance the President’s Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired.”
That would be nice. Wouldn’t it?
In a fair system you’d be 100% correct, and I’d be happy.
But that’s not the world we live in.
It’s not a matter of being fair. You can’t forcefully extract funds from an entity outside of your jurisdiction. Countries that have agreements on inter federal law enforcement will never persecute someone in their own borders for another country if the charges or suit would have no merit in their country.
…
Who said anything about that?
It’s a civil judgement and I legitimately can’t tell if you typo’d prosecute or think this is persecution.
But if it was a substantial judgement you may see stuff like sanctions that could happen even without the other countries cooperation