5 C.F.R. § 6.4

Removal of incumbents of excepted positions

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Except as required by statute, the Civil Service Rules and Regulations shall not apply to removals from positions listed in Schedules A, C, D, E, Policy/Career, or G, or from positions excepted from the competitive service by statute. The Civil Service Rules and Regulations shall apply to removals from positions listed in Schedule B of persons who have competitive status.

[E.O. 14317, 90 FR 34754, July 23, 2025]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1976–2020 · leading case: Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982). · cites it 2× “Although his position was such as to fall within the "excepted" service, which would ordinarily mean that civil service rules and regulations applicable to removals would not protect him, 5 CFR § 6.4 (1982), his status as a veteran entitled him to special protections.”

Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 953 F.3d 760 (Fed. Cir. 2020). “Though Executive Order 13843, dated July 10, 2018, placed all administrative law judges in the excepted service, and thus “not subject to the requirements of 5 CFR, part 302” and further amended 5 C.F.R. § 6.4 to eliminate the application of title 5 protections to adminis-…”

Hamlet v. United States, 14 Cl. Ct. 62 (Ct. Cl. 1988). “Hamlet further contends that absent the remedy sought in this Court, she would have no remedy whatsoever against the United States for her allegedly wrongful discharge. The fact that she is not a civil service employee within the meaning of 5 U.”

Esposo v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 321 F. App'x 961 (Fed. Cir. 2009). “See 5 C.F.R. § 6.4 . Ms. Esposo asserts that 5 U.”

Bright, 210 Ct. Cl. 729 (Ct. Cl. 1976). “§§ 2102 (a) (2), 2103; and 5 C.F.R. § 6.4 and 213.3172, and that the only reason he was given a hearing was because plaintiff claimed Ms right -of free'speech (criticism of the Probation Department) was the cause of his dismissal.”

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.