## Facts

- Bruce Fleming, an English professor at the United States Naval Academy, challenged employment actions taken by academy administrators.
- Fleming alleged three actions were retaliatory and violated his First Amendment right to academic freedom:
  - a letter of reprimand placed in his personnel file,
  - denial of a merit pay increase, and
  - denial of a request for professional funding.
- The government characterized the challenged measures as federal “personnel actions” governed by the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA).
- Fleming did not pursue CSRA administrative processes, including filing a complaint with the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) or seeking review through the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) where available.
- Fleming instead filed a federal district court action against the Secretary of the Navy seeking relief on constitutional grounds.

## Issues

1. Whether the CSRA’s comprehensive remedial scheme precludes a federal employee from bringing a direct First Amendment claim in district court arising from covered personnel actions.
2. Whether failure to pursue CSRA administrative remedies (including OSC review for alleged prohibited personnel practices) requires dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
- The court held the CSRA provides an integrated, exclusive framework for review of federal employment disputes involving covered personnel actions.
- The court treated the reprimand, pay decision, and funding denial as CSRA-covered personnel actions for which the statute channels challenges through OSC (and, in some circumstances, the MSPB).
- Because Fleming did not invoke and complete the CSRA process before suing, the district court lacked jurisdiction over his constitutional claim.

## Legal Principles

- The CSRA establishes a comprehensive and integrated scheme of administrative and judicial review intended to be the exclusive route for covered federal employment disputes.
- “Personnel actions” under the CSRA include disciplinary or corrective actions and decisions concerning pay; challenges to such actions generally must proceed through CSRA mechanisms.
- Constitutional objections to personnel actions may constitute “prohibited personnel practices” within the CSRA and are subject to OSC investigation in the first instance.
- A federal employee may not bypass the CSRA’s remedial structure by reframing a personnel dispute as a standalone constitutional claim in district court.
- Failure to exhaust CSRA-prescribed remedies warrants dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit held that a federal employee’s First Amendment academic-freedom challenge to a reprimand, merit pay denial, and funding denial had to be pursued through the CSRA’s administrative process, and that the district court lacked jurisdiction because the employee did not exhaust those remedies.


Fleming v. Spencer, 724 F. App’x 203 (4th Cir. 2018)