5 C.F.R. § 151.121
Use of official authority; coercion; candidacy; prohibitions
A State or local officer or employee may not—
(a) Use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election or a nomination for office; or
(b) Directly or indirectly coerce, attempt to coerce, command, or advise a State or local officer or employee to pay, lend, or contribute anything of value to a political party, committee, organization, agency, or person for a political purpose.
(c) Be a candidate for elective office if the salary of the employee is paid completely, directly or indirectly, by loans or grants made by the United States or a Federal agency.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases, 1987–2010 · leading case: Texans Uniting for Reform & Freedom v. Saenz, 319 S.W.3d 914 (Tex. App. 2010).
Texans Uniting for Reform & Freedom v. Saenz, 319 S.W.3d 914 (Tex. App. 2010). “" TURF argues that such activities violate the federal Hatch Act and, more specifically, 5 C.F.R. § 151.121 , which provides that "[a] State or local officer or employee may not .”
Molina-Crespo v. United States Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 547 F.3d 651 (6th Cir. 2008). “The OSC advised Molina that his candidacy violated § 1502(a)(3) of the Act, which prohibits a "State or local officer or employee" from "be[ing] a candidate for elective office," as well as the Act's implementing regulations embodied in 5 C.F.R. § 151.121 (c). During the phone…”
Crespo v. United States Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 486 F. Supp. 2d 680 (N.D. Ohio 2007). “§ 1502 (a)(3) 2 and its implementing regulations found at 5 C.F.R. § 151.121 (c). Section 1502(a)(3) prohibits covered employees from running for elective office.”
Bauers v. Cornett, 865 F.2d 1517 (8th Cir. 1989). “45 At that time, Civil Service Rules prohibited: 46 Directly or indirectly soliciting, receiving, collecting, handling, disbursing, or accounting for assessments, contributions, or other funds for a partisan political purpose; 47 5 C.F.R. 151.121(3) (1974, superceded). 48 In…”
Bauers v. Cornett, 865 F.2d 1517 (8th Cir. 1989). “At that time, Civil Service Rules prohibited: Directly or indirectly soliciting, receiving, collecting, handling, disbursing, or accounting for assessments, contributions, or other funds for a partisan political purpose; 5 C.F.R. 151.121(3) (1974, superceded). In 1974, these…”
Bauers v. Cornett, 659 F. Supp. 776 (E.D. Mo. 1987). “§ 1502 (a)(2), states, in pertinent part, (a) A State or local officer or employee may not— (2) directly or indirectly coerce, attempt to coerce, command, or advise a State or local officer or employee to pay, lend, or contribute anything of value to a party, committee,…”
Texans Uniting for Reform & Freedom v. Amadeo Saenz, Jr., P.E., Individually & in His Off. Capacity as Exec. Dir. of the Texas Dep't of Transp. Coby Chase, , Individually & in His Off. Capacity as Dir. of the Texas Dep't of Transp. (Tex. App. 2010). “" TURF argues that such activities violate the federal Hatch Act and, more specifically, 5 C.F.R. § 151.121 , which provides that "[a] State or local officer or employee may not .”
Texans Uniting for Reform & Freedom v. Amadeo Saenz, Jr., P.E., Individually & in His Off. Capacity as Exec. Dir. of the Texas Dep't of Transp. Coby Chase, , Individually & in His Off. Capacity as Dir. of the Texas Dep't of Transp. (Tex. App. 2010). “” TURF argues that such activities violate the federal Hatch Act and, more specifically, 5 C.F.R. § 151.121 , which provides that “[a] State or local officer or employee may not .”
Molina-Crespo v. US Merit Sys. (6th Cir. 2008). “The OSC advised Molina that his candidacy violated § 1502(a)(3) of the Act, which prohibits a “State or local officer or employee” from “be[ing] a candidate for elective office,” as well as the Act’s implementing regulations embodied in 5 C.F.R. § 151.121 (c). During the phone…”
— 5 C.F.R. § 151.121(3) — 2 cases
Bauers v. Cornett, 865 F.2d 1517 (8th Cir. 1989). “45 At that time, Civil Service Rules prohibited: 46 Directly or indirectly soliciting, receiving, collecting, handling, disbursing, or accounting for assessments, contributions, or other funds for a partisan political purpose; 47 5 C.F.R. 151.121(3) (1974, superceded). 48 In…”
Bauers v. Cornett, 865 F.2d 1517 (8th Cir. 1989). “At that time, Civil Service Rules prohibited: Directly or indirectly soliciting, receiving, collecting, handling, disbursing, or accounting for assessments, contributions, or other funds for a partisan political purpose; 5 C.F.R. 151.121(3) (1974, superceded). In 1974, these…”
— 5 C.F.R. § 151.121(b) — 3 cases
Bauers v. Cornett, 865 F.2d 1517 (8th Cir. 1989). “45 At that time, Civil Service Rules prohibited: 46 Directly or indirectly soliciting, receiving, collecting, handling, disbursing, or accounting for assessments, contributions, or other funds for a partisan political purpose; 47 5 C.F.R. 151.121(3) (1974, superceded). 48 In…”
Bauers v. Cornett, 865 F.2d 1517 (8th Cir. 1989). “At that time, Civil Service Rules prohibited: Directly or indirectly soliciting, receiving, collecting, handling, disbursing, or accounting for assessments, contributions, or other funds for a partisan political purpose; 5 C.F.R. 151.121(3) (1974, superceded). In 1974, these…”
Bauers v. Cornett, 659 F. Supp. 776 (E.D. Mo. 1987). “§ 1502 (a)(2), states, in pertinent part, (a) A State or local officer or employee may not— (2) directly or indirectly coerce, attempt to coerce, command, or advise a State or local officer or employee to pay, lend, or contribute anything of value to a party, committee,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.