Full Breakdown
Federal Circuit Grants En Banc Review of Jackler v. DOJ, Raising Stakes for Presidential Firing Authority
6/19/2026, 5:24:35 AM
En Banc Review of Jackler v. DOJ
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, on June 2026, ordered an en banc hearing of Jackler v. DOJ, challenging the 2025 termination of two career immigration judges.
Background & Context
Immigration judges are civil servants. In March 2026 the Merit Systems Protection Board ruled they are “inferior officers” removable at-will under Article II. The DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion in September 2025.
Key Figures & Groups
Plaintiffs: former judges Megan Jackler and Brandon Jaroch, represented by Washington Litigation Group. Defendant: the Department of Justice. MSPB (two Republican members), Senate Democrats (Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Sen. Gary Peters), and MSPB nominee James Woodruff.
Timeline
Sept 2025 – DOJ OLC opinion on removal. Mar 2026 – MSPB rules judges are inferior officers. Apr 2026 – Senate Democrats file amicus brief. Jun 2026 – en banc; hearing fall 2026.
Data & Statistics
Two immigration judges and two Republican MSPB members are involved. En banc hearings are rare; the Federal Circuit’s last full bench sat in summer 2025 for a tariff case.
Why It Matters / Impact
Upholding the MSPB ruling could expand presidential authority to fire career federal employees, weakening civil-service protections and potentially affecting thousands of workers beyond immigration judges.
Official Statements & Responses
The DOJ expressed confidence the MSPB decision will survive scrutiny. The Office of Legal Counsel reiterated Article II permits removal of immigration judges. The MSPB said its jurisdiction is limited to matters Congress granted.
Criticism & Opposition
Sen. Chris Van Hollen called the MSPB ruling “wrong on its merits” and a dangerous precedent. Sen. Gary Peters warned the board is deciding constitutional questions beyond its authority.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
The MSPB says it lacks jurisdiction to intervene in firings; Democrats argue the board overstepped by interpreting constitutional issues. The court must decide if judges are “inferior officers” subject to at-will removal.
Verbatim Quotes
- “The Federal Circuit’s decision to hear this case en banc indicates how important this appeal is,” — Nathaniel Zelinsky, Senior Counsel, Washington Litigation Group
- “What we look at when we’re deciding these cases and having them brought before us is what did Congress give us as far as authority goes? And within that small jurisdiction, whether or not we have the authority to act — that’s really how confined we keep it,” — James Woodruff, MSPB Member, Senate Nominee
- “I’m troubled by the procedural ruling in March of 2026 where actually the board made the decision that they can determine what law is constitutional or not,” — Gary Peters, Ranking Member, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee
- “The Merit Systems Protection Board’s decision which allowed the attorney general to fire immigration judges at will is not only wrong on its merits, but it also sets a dangerous precedent that could threaten employees across the federal workforce,” — Chris Van Hollen, Senator, Maryland
What's Next
The en banc panel plans oral arguments in fall 2026. Its ruling will determine if the MSPB’s at-will classification stands, shaping presidential removal power over career civil servants.
