Marcia R. Harrison v. Otis R. Bowen, Secretary, H.H.S

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that nonpreference eligible excepted employees do not have implied right of action under CSRA to challenge adverse actions
• contrasting CSRA’s “detailed” and “extensive scheme regulating civil service personnel decisions” with “the more general APA” (quotation marks omitted)
• \reading between the lines [of the CSRA] to interpolate remedies Congress did not provide can only lead the Court into error\
• “[The CSRA] creates an extensive scheme regulating civil service personnel decisions” and courts should not “allow an employee to circumvent this detailed scheme governing federal employer-employee relations by suing under the more general APA.”
• “removed and reassigned employees do not have an implied right of action under the CSRA to enforce the prohibition against reprisals for whistleblowing, but must seek relief through the OSC because such reprisals constitute a ‘prohibited personnel practice’ ”
• discussing how certain statutes constrain executive discretion to remove employees

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).