## Facts

- John F. Singer was hired in 1971 as a clerk-typist in the Seattle office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under a one-year probationary appointment governed by federal probationary-employee regulations.
- At hiring, Singer disclosed to the office director that he was homosexual.
- The United States Civil Service Commission (CSC) investigated Singer’s “suitability for employment in the competitive Federal service,” interviewed him, and determined he was unsuitable.
- The CSC’s determination relied on Singer’s public conduct and resulting publicity, including accounts that he openly displayed same-sex affection at a prior workplace, sought a same-sex marriage license that generated publicity, and gave media statements about being homosexual while identifying himself as a federal employee.
- The CSC characterized the conduct as “immoral and notoriously disgraceful” and concluded it could impair the efficiency and public reputation of the service; Singer was removed during his probationary period.
- Singer pursued administrative review; a hearing examiner upheld the unsuitability determination, and the Board of Appeals and Review affirmed.
- Singer then sued for declaratory and injunctive relief and damages, alleging inadequate evidentiary support and violations of due process and the First Amendment.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the CSC based on substantial evidence in the administrative record.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported the CSC’s finding that Singer’s conduct had a sufficient nexus to the “efficiency of the service” to justify an unsuitability determination and removal of a probationary employee.
2. Whether removal based on Singer’s publicly expressed homosexuality and related conduct violated due process.
3. Whether the removal impermissibly infringed Singer’s First Amendment rights to speech and association.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the CSC.
- The court held the administrative record contained substantial evidence supporting the CSC’s unsuitability finding, including a sufficient nexus between Singer’s publicized conduct and service efficiency.
- The court held the procedures provided (notice, interview response opportunity, and post-termination administrative review) satisfied due process for a probationary employee under the governing framework.
- The court rejected Singer’s First Amendment challenge, concluding the agency action was justified as reasonably related to efficiency of the public service and public confidence under then-prevailing standards.

## Legal Principles

- Judicial review of federal personnel suitability determinations is deferential; courts examine whether the agency applied the correct legal standard and whether substantial evidence supports the agency’s findings.
- Adverse federal personnel action based on off-duty conduct requires a demonstrable connection (“nexus”) to the efficiency of the service.
- For probationary federal employees, due process is satisfied where the employee receives notice of the concerns, an opportunity to respond, and meaningful administrative review consistent with applicable regulations.
- Government employers may impose and enforce employment-related restrictions where the agency shows a sufficient relationship between the employee’s conduct (including publicly expressed conduct) and the efficiency, integrity, or public confidence in the service, as evaluated under the governing doctrine.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit upheld the CSC’s removal of a probationary federal employee as unsuitable, finding substantial evidence that widely publicized conduct—treated as conduct affecting service efficiency rather than mere status—had an adequate nexus to the efficiency and reputation of the public service, and rejecting due process and First Amendment challenges under the legal standards then in force.


Singer v. U.S. Civil Serv. Comm’n, 530 F.2d 247 (9th Cir. 1976)