Senate Dems join calls for EPA to reinstate dissenting workers

A group of 17 Senate Democrats on Wednesday joined the chorus of voices calling on the Environmental Protection Agency to reinstate more than 140 employees who were placed on administrative leave earlier this month after signing a letter critical of the agency’s direction since Trump returned to office in January.

Last month, nearly 300 EPA employees sent a “Declaration of Dissent” to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin accusing the Trump administration of “recklessly undermining” EPA’s mission, abandoning scientific and environmental justice efforts and promoting a “culture of fear” within the agency. While more than 100 of the initial signatories endorsed the letter anonymously, that number quickly grew to over 600.

In response, Zeldin placed more than 140 of the roughly 170 named signatories on administrative leave, pending an investigation into their conduct. Though initial leave notices placed employees on leave through July 17, they remained on leave as of Wednesday.

In a letter to Zeldin, Senate Democrats led by Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., joined EPA’s union and other environmental nonprofits in demanding those workers be reinstated and allowed to return to work, citing the Supreme Court’s extensive case law protecting civil servants’ First Amendment rights.

“In a long series of cases dating back to the seminal Pickering v. Board of Education decision, the [Supreme] Court has ‘recognized that speech by public employees on subject matter related to their employment holds special value precisely because those employees gain knowledge of matters of public concern through their employment,’” the lawmakers wrote. “Here, the declaration [of dissent] was published on a public-facing website and sent to lawmakers; it details matters of public concern through the perceived politicization of EPA and deterioration of public trust, perceived threats to objective and science-based decision-making, and apprehensions over EPA’s ability to serve communities which bear high pollution and climate change risk burdens.”

EPA officials have previously justified the employees’ suspensions by claiming that the letter amounted to “sabotaging” the agency. But the Democrats wrote that federal court precedent particularly protects bureaucrats who dissent from the president’s agenda.

“Federal employees are permitted to speak out on matters of public concern in their personal capacities, and even when they do so in dissent, the First Amendment protects their speech,” they wrote. “In fact, across the federal government, federal agencies have developed mechanisms to ensure federal workers can express alternative viewpoints without fear of reprisal, understanding that dissent improves policy outcomes, increases accountability, and improves morale; in that spirit, the EPA employees sought to raise issues of public concern to senior officials. We urge you to restore these employees to active service immediately and affirm your employees’ ability to express their viewpoints without fear of retaliation, because debate and dissent are valuable policymaking tools.”