Independent Agency Rules — Week of Jun 8, 2026

This week, three government actions raised questions about whether federal agencies will be able to continue making decisions based on expertise rather than political direction.

The most significant was an executive order, Implementing Schedule Policy/Career in the Excepted Service, signed June 3, 2026. It moves many federal employees in "policy-influencing" roles into a new job category where they can be fired without the usual protections against unfair dismissal. The administration says this is about accountability—making it easier to remove poor performers. This might matter because civil service protections exist to ensure that scientists at the EPA, reviewers at the FDA, and analysts across government can do their jobs based on evidence without fear of being fired for reaching conclusions that conflict with political goals. If the new category is defined broadly and used selectively, it could pressure career staff to align their work with political preferences rather than professional judgment.

That said, the most likely alternative explanation is that this is a genuine effort to fix a real problem: federal managers have long reported difficulty removing employees for poor performance. The order includes language about merit-based hiring and rewarding good work, which supports this reading. It is also possible that internal agency policies and existing oversight mechanisms could constrain how the order is applied in practice. Whether it becomes a tool for politicization or improved management will depend on implementation.

Separately, Senator Durbin gave a floor speech warning that the FBI had eliminated an internal office responsible for making sure surveillance powers under FISA Section 702 are used properly, and that an acting intelligence director with no intelligence background had been appointed. These are significant claims, though they come from an opposition senator and may reflect the most alarming interpretation of personnel changes that could also be part of broader organizational restructuring.

A new House bill, HB 9277, would let judges throw out scientific evidence that agencies use to justify regulations if the judges decide the science isn't reliable enough. This could give courts, rather than expert agencies, the final say on scientific questions—though the bill is newly introduced and may never advance.

Limitations: This analysis is based on a small number of documents from one week. The executive order's real-world effects are not yet visible. The bill has not received committee action. This is AI-generated analysis, not a finding of fact.