Today, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) announces a new advisory rescinding the Hatch Act advisory opinion dated May 20, 2024, and a related advisory opinion dated October 15, 2024. The Hatch Act, a federal law passed in 1939, limits certain political activity of federal employees while they are on duty, in the federal workplace, or acting in their official capacity. The new Hatch Act advisory opinion (the “April 25 Advisory") supersedes the May 20, 2024, and October 15, 2024, opinions in three ways.
First, OSC will return to its traditional practice of referring Hatch Act violations by White House Commissioned officers to the President for appropriate action.
Second, OSC is pausing the referral of cases against former employees to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) until the legal question concerning jurisdiction is resolved.
Third, OSC is discarding the “year-round workplace political item prohibition" on wearing or displaying of political candidate or political party items in the workplace related to the campaigns of “current or contemporaneous political figures (CCPFs)." In practice, the blanket prohibition created too great a burden on First Amendment interests.
The updates summarized above are detailed in the April 25 Advisory Opinion available here.
***
4/28 Supplemental Notes
The May 20, 2024 and October 15, 2024 advisory opinions were departures from precedent supported by numerous Special Counsels who had been appointed by multiple administrations over many years.
Historically, OSC has consistently maintained that only the President has the authority to discipline White House commissioned officers for violations of the Hatch Act because OSC determined that taking White House commissioned officers before the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) would create a conflict with the President's appointment authority under 3 U.S. Code § 105. Accordingly, OSC issues reports to the President rather than filing disciplinary actions with the MSPB. In 2024, OSC decided to have the MSPB make its own determination on its authority and filed a disciplinary action with the MSPB against a White House commissioned officer. As noted in its April 25, 2025 Advisory Opinion, OSC is now reinstituting its longstanding practice of reporting violations by commissioned officers to the President, with a recommendation for discipline. For all other federal employees who are not commissioned officers or Senate-confirmed Presidential appointees, OSC will continue to seek disciplinary action before the MSPB.
In addition, since at least the year 2000, OSC advised that the Hatch Act did not bar federal employees from wearing or displaying in the workplace items that supported or opposed any former—but not current—candidate for partisan political office. For example, OSC regularly advised that while an employee could not display a campaign mug from a presidential candidate in the federal workplace prior to the presidential election, an employee could display that same mug after the presidential election. In 2024, OSC issued an Advisory Opinion dated May 20 that added a year-round prohibition on campaign items related to “current or contemporaneous political figures," based on a perceived link between a former candidate and that candidate's political party. OSC has received many questions about allowable items indicating confusion based on the 2024 Advisory Opinion, as well as a concern about the Advisory Opinion's infringement on First Amendment rights. The 2024 Advisory Opinion failed to account for the fact that voters can vote by individual candidate, rather than by party line, i.e., showing support for a candidate does not necessarily equate support for the party. Also, because the 2024 Advisory Opinion prohibited only “campaign-related items" post-election, OSC was in the untenable position of advising what employees could and could not display based on, for example, whether the items were purchased at a pre-election political rally or at an inauguration event. Accordingly, OSC has reinstituted its longstanding prior position—based on the Hatch Act, the Hatch Act regulations, and the legislative history of the Hatch Act—that the display in the workplace of items promoting or opposing any former candidate of any political party does not constitute a Hatch Act violation.