5 U.S.C. § 7326

Penalties

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar

An employee or individual who violates section 7323 or 7324 shall be subject to—(1) disciplinary action consisting of removal, reduction in grade, debarment from Federal employment for a period not to exceed 5 years, suspension, or reprimand;(2) an assessment of a civil penalty not to exceed $1,000; or(3) any combination of the penalties described in paragraph (1) or (2).(Added Pub. L. 112–230, § 4, Dec. 28, 2012, 126 Stat. 1617; amended Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title X, § 1097(k)(1), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1626.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 7326, added Pub. L. 103–94, § 2(a), Oct. 6, 1993, 107 Stat. 1004, related to penalties, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 112–230, § 4, Dec. 28, 2012, 126 Stat. 1617.

Another prior section 7326, Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 526, authorized nonpartisan political activities, prior to the general revision of this subchapter by Pub. L. 103–94.

A prior section 7327, Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 526; Pub. L. 96–54, § 2(a)(14), (15), Aug. 14, 1979, 93 Stat. 382; Pub. L. 97–468, title VI, § 615(b)(1)(E), Jan. 14, 1983, 96 Stat. 2578, related to permitted political activity in certain municipalities where employees reside, prior to the general revision of this subchapter by Pub. L. 103–94.

A prior section 7328, added Pub. L. 96–191, § 8(e)(1), Feb. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 33, exempted employees of the General Accounting Office from provisions of this subchapter, prior to the general revision of this subchapter by Pub. L. 103–94.

Amendments

2017—Pub. L. 115–91 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “An employee or individual who violates section 7323 or 7324 shall be subject to removal, reduction in grade, debarment from Federal employment for a period not to exceed 5 years, suspension, reprimand, or an assessment of a civil penalty not to exceed $1,000.”

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2017 Amendment; Applicability

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title X, § 1097(k)(2), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1626, provided that: “The amendment made by paragraph (1) [amending this section] shall apply to any violation of section 7323 or 7324 of title 5, United States Code, occurring after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 12, 2017].”

Effective Date; Applicability

Section effective 30 days after Dec. 28, 2012, see section 5(a) of Pub. L. 112–230, set out as an Effective Date of 2012 Amendment note under section 1501 of this title.

Pub. L. 112–230, § 5(b), Dec. 28, 2012, 126 Stat. 1617, provided that:“(1)In general.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), the amendment made by section 4 [enacting this section and repealing former section 7326 of this title] shall apply with respect to any violation occurring before, on, or after the effective date of this Act [see above].“(2)Exception.—The amendment made by section 4 shall not apply with respect to an alleged violation if, before the effective date of this Act—“(A) the Special Counsel has presented a complaint for disciplinary action, under section 1215 of title 5, United States Code, with respect to the alleged violation; or“(B) the employee alleged to have committed the violation has entered into a signed settlement agreement with the Special Counsel with respect to the alleged violation.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 29 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1971–2025 · leading case: United States Civil Serv. Comm'n v. Nat'l Ass'n of Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548 (1973).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States Civil Serv. Comm'n v. Nat'l Ass'n of Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548 (1973). · cites it 4× “" Under § 18, now 5 U. S. C. § 7326 , the prohibition against political activity was not to be construed to prohibit political activity in nonpartisan elections or in connection with questions not specifically identified with any national or state political party, such as…”

Robert D. Alexander v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 165 F.3d 474 (6th Cir. 1999). · cites it 3× “Alexander’s contention is further undermined by the fact that Congress included suspension without pay as a penalty for federal employees who violate the Act, but whose violations do not warrant removal.”

McEntee v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 404 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2005). “” 5 U.S.C. § 7326 (1) (1988). It is worth noting that the earlier definition of “nonpartisan political activity,” where no candidate could be nominated or elected as representing a major political party, is simply the converse of the definition in the current statute for…”

Manuel Soldevila v. Sec'y of Agric. of the United States of Am., Etc., 512 F.2d 427 (1st Cir. 1975). · cites it 3× “Upon receipt of this letter, the appellee went to the Civil Service Commission and, although this was not the next appropriate step in his administrative appeal, asked for an advisory ruling of the applicability of the Hatch Act to Puerto Rican Parties not affiliated with…”

Robert T. Magill v. Dennis M. Lynch, 560 F.2d 22 (1st Cir. 1977). “” 5 U.S.C. § 7326 . The Oklahoma statute is not so expressly limited.”

Lewis v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 594 F. App'x 974 (Fed. Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “at 119 (quoting 5 U.S.C. § 7326 ). Because the Purnell factors had been adopted when there was a presumption of removal — which no longer exists — the Board concluded that, under the .”

Morris Biller & Vincent R. Sombrotto v. United States Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 863 F.2d 1079 (2d Cir. 1988). “The very purposes of the Hatch Act and the evils it sought to eliminate demonstrate, in fact, that it is engaging in organized political activity by federal employees that threatens government integrity and effi *1090 ciency. The dangers of politicized administration of the…”

Bauers v. Cornett, 659 F. Supp. 776 (E.D. Mo. 1987). · cites it 3× “In support of her contention that the Hatch Act does not prohibit her from engaging in non-partisan political activity, plaintiff cites 5 U.S.C. § 7326 . While this section does allow a *781 covered person to participate in an activity concerning a "question which is not…”

Elder v. Rampton, 360 F. Supp. 559 (D. Utah 1972). · cites it 2× “§ 7324 ; see 5 U. S.C. § 7326) which phrase is accompanied, according to the Letter Carriers court, by 3,000 interpretations whose cumulative meaning is inscrutable.”

Eric M. Kane v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 210 F.3d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2000). “” 5 U.S.C. § 7326 (1994). In determining whether to mitigate the statutory penalty, the board considers the nature of the offense and the extent of the employee’s participation, the employee’s past employment record, the political coloring of the employee’s activities, whether…”

Geary v. Renne, 911 F.2d 280 (9th Cir. 1990). “" 5 U.S.C. § 7326 . Thus, it specifically addresses the corrupting influence that political party organizations have on the administration of the law in a nonpartisan context.”

Mancuso v. Taft, 341 F. Supp. 574 (D.R.I. 1972). “5 U.S.C.A. § 7326 : “§ 7326. Nonpartisan political activity permitted ' Section 7324(a) (2) of this title does not prohibit political activity in connection with— (1) an election and the preceding campaign if none of the candidates is to be nominated or elected at that election…”

Show all 29 citing cases →

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.