5 U.S.C. § 7321
Political participation
It is the policy of the Congress that employees should be encouraged to exercise fully, freely, and without fear of penalty or reprisal, and to the extent not expressly prohibited by law, their right to participate or to refrain from participating in the political processes of the Nation.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1970–2024 · leading case: McEntee v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 404 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
McEntee v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 404 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2005). “” 5 U.S.C. § 7321 (2000). The legislative history provides further guidance on the purpose of the 1993 Amendments.”
United States v. Wilcox, 66 M.J. 442 (C.A.A.F. 2008). “5 U.S.C. §§ 7321 , 7322; Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993, Pub.”
Michael L. Shakman & Paul M. Lurie v. The Democratic Org. of Cook Cnty., 435 F.2d 267 (7th Cir. 1970). “I agree with the observation made by defendants that the relief requested is tantamount to asking the court to enlarge the Federal Hatch Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 7321 et seq., to encompass the political activity of local government employees.”
United States Servicemen's Fund v. Eastland, 488 F.2d 1252 (D.C. Cir. 1973). “§ 90f; Federal Employees, 5 U.S.C. §§ 7321 , 7323; Foundation of the Federal Bar Association, 36 U.”
French v. Devine, 547 F. Supp. 443 (D.D.C. 1982). “§ 2201 , that the provisions of 5 U.S.C. § 7321 et seq. do not apply to him, or are unconstitutional as applied to him.”
Bauers v. Cornett, 865 F.2d 1517 (8th Cir. 1989). “5 U.S. C. § 7321 et seq., 53 Stat. 1147 (Aug.”
Burrus v. Vegliante, 247 F. Supp. 2d 372 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). “5 U.S.C. § 7321 (2002). Congress intended that the Act be interpreted in favor of free expression.”
Evanston Firefighters Ass'n v. Illinois State Labor Relations Bd., 609 N.E.2d 790 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993). “(5) The City’s ordinance is not consistent with the policies underlying the Federal Hatch Act, 5 U.S.C. §7321 et seq. (1988), and therefore violates the first amendment of the United States Constitution.”
Rhodes v. Superior Court of the D.C., 303 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “§§ 12112 - 12117, and because of his political activity in violation of the Hatch Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 7321 - 7326. ADA Claim Plaintiff has a visual impairment, see Am.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Off. of Special Couns. (D. Maryland 2020). “The Hatch Act The Hatch Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 7321–7326 (“the Act”), restricts federal employees’ political activities both while off-duty and on-duty to “promot[e] efficient, merit-based advancement, avoid[] the appearance of politically-driven justice, prevent[] the coercion of…”
United States Postal Serv. v. Am. Postal Workers Union (D.D.C. 2020). “Background In the fall before the 2016 presidential election, Senator Ron Johnson filed a complaint on behalf of one of his constituents, a Postal Service employee, with the Office of Special Counsel, an agency charged with investigating, prosecuting, and rendering advisory…”
Proj. on Gov't Oversight, Inc. v. U.S. Off. of Special Couns. (D.D.C. 2024). “BACKGROUND1 The Hatch Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 7321–26, forbids federal “employee[s]” from “us[ing] [their] official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election.”
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.