Full Breakdown
DOJ Lawsuit Claims Agency Systematically Denied Telework Accommodations to Disabled Employees
6/4/2026, 9:03:13 AM
Allegations of Discriminatory Telework Denials
A federal lawsuit filed in June 2026 accuses the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) of discriminating against two disabled employees—Joshua Mauldin and Tarik Smajic—by refusing to grant telework as a reasonable accommodation. Both men, senior IT program managers in the Criminal Division’s Office of Administration, had previously teleworked without performance issues. After President Donald Trump’s January 2025 return-to-office directive, each submitted formal accommodation requests; the agency allegedly responded with interim arrangements, demotions, and performance penalties, prompting the plaintiffs to seek compensatory damages and reversal of adverse actions.
Background & Context
President Trump’s Jan 2025 order required federal workers to return to their offices three days per week, exempting only employees with qualifying disabilities. The DOJ, like many agencies, tightened scrutiny of telework requests, arguing that some civil servants had misused remote-work provisions. The lawsuit contends that this policy shift triggered a “systematic, agency-wide practice” of denying final telework decisions to employees with disabilities.
Key Figures & Groups
- Joshua Mauldin – Marine and Air Force veteran, 100 % permanently disabled veteran with PTSD, generalized anxiety, and cardiac conditions; GS-14 supervisory IT manager.
- Tarik Smajic – Employee with chronic pain and progressive spinal limitations from a 2017 motor-vehicle accident; GS-13 IT manager.
- DOJ Office of Administration – Supervisors who evaluated and denied the accommodation requests.
- DOJ leadership – Has not provided comment on the lawsuit.
Timeline of Key Developments
- Jan 2025 – Trump’s return-to-office directive issued.
- Feb 2025 – Mauldin requests telework >= 9 days/10-day pay period.
- Apr 2025 – Mauldin contacts EEOC counselor after 30-day deadline passes; receives interim one-day-in-office arrangement.
- July 2025 – Mauldin receives interim daily telework arrangement tied to a pending heart procedure.
- Nov 2025 – Mauldin’s position downgraded from GS-14 to GS-13; salary reduced.
- Dec 2025 – Mauldin placed on medical leave.
- Mar 2025 – Smajic’s supervisor dismisses his pain-related accommodation request.
- July 2025 – Smajic seeks daily telework after MRI shows condition worsening; request denied a month later.
- Sept 2025 – Smajic reports to the office in extreme pain on multiple dates, leaving early on several occasions.
- Nov 2025 – Smajic receives a medical questionnaire regarding an ergonomic chair.
- Dec 2025 – DOJ indicates it will pursue “involuntary reassignment as an ‘accommodation of last resort.’”
Data & Statistics
- Two plaintiffs (Mauldin, Smajic).
- Mauldin’s demotion: GS-14 -> GS-13, salary cut.
- Smajic’s telework request: three days/week (pre-2025 policy) -> daily telework (post-2025 request).
- Smajic documented in-office attendance on seven specific dates in September 2025.
Official Statements & Responses
The DOJ declined to comment on the lawsuit. The filing notes a prior settlement with former DOJ employee Terry Jackson, who also alleged termination after requesting telework as a disability accommodation. DOJ policy maintains that employees with qualifying disabilities are exempt from the return-to-office mandate, but the agency asserts that accommodations must not impose undue hardship.
Criticism & Opposition
Plaintiffs’ attorneys argue the agency’s refusal to issue final telework decisions and the subsequent demotion “caused a significant deterioration” of Mauldin’s PTSD and cardiac conditions. They also highlight a supervisor’s remark to Smajic: “It’s your body, you can choose not to take the pills.”
On-the-Ground Reports
Smajic’s attorneys describe him working in “extreme pain” on multiple September days, leaving early, and taking ad-hoc leave. Mauldin’s medical leave began in December 2025 after his demotion and ongoing health issues.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
The lawsuit provides no interviews with employees supervised by Mauldin, nor independent verification of the agency’s performance-evaluation process. DOJ’s lack of response leaves the agency’s perspective undocumented.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Because Mauldin’s psychiatric and cardiac disabilities interact, tasks that might be routine for others, such as attending in-person meetings, working in high-traffic office areas and commuting, carry a significant and documented medical risk for him,” — Plaintiffs’ filing
- “The prolonged uncertainty caused by the agency’s refusal to grant Mauldin’s requests for reasonable accommodations, combined with the stress and instability caused by his demotion despite his strong performance evaluations, caused a significant deterioration of Mauldin’s PTSD, anxiety and stress-sensitive cardiac conditions,” — Plaintiffs’ attorneys
- “When Smajic explained that the refusal to grant his RAs had resulted in increased pain and forced him to increase his pain medication dosage, [the supervisor] responded with words to the effect of, ‘It’s your body, you can choose not to take the pills,’” — Plaintiffs’ filing
- “Smajic reported to the office in person, usually in extreme pain, on Sept. 8, 9, 10, 16, 18, 23 and 29, 2025, and had to leave early on several of those days because of the unbearable pain,” — Plaintiffs’ filing
- “instead intended to pursue involuntary reassignment as an ‘accommodation of last resort.’” — Plaintiffs’ filing
- “ DOJ did not respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit.” — Article report
What’s Next
The suit seeks compensatory damages, reversal of the demotions, approval of the telework requests, and an injunction against the alleged systematic refusal to grant telework accommodations. If successful, the case could prompt DOJ to revise its telework accommodation procedures and influence broader federal guidance on disability-related remote work.
