Case: United States Ex Rel. Johnson V. Raytheon Co., 93 F.4th 776 (5th Cir. 2024)
If you have questions about this case and how the Court’s decision may affect your situation, or have other questions about your rights as an employee, our New Mexico employee’s rights lawyer at Davie & Valdez P.C. is available to talk.
Brief Facts
A defense-contractor employee lost his security clearance after Navy investigators concluded he committed violations. He alleged his employer fed false information to the Navy and then fired him. He sought discovery to show the clearance-based reason was a pretext for retaliation.
What The Court Decided
The Fifth Circuit applied the Supreme Court’s Egan rule to private contractors: courts won’t probe the merits or motives of a federal security-clearance decision. Because deciding pretext would require second-guessing the government’s clearance revocation, the claims could not proceed.
What This Means In Plain English
If you work on a contract requiring a clearance, courts usually can’t review why the government yanked it. That can limit certain retaliation or discrimination claims tied to the clearance decision.
How This Affects Employees
Employees on clearance-required projects should document non-clearance-related issues that may support separate claims.
Expect strict limits on discovery into the clearance process itself.
Consult counsel early if a clearance issue arises to preserve non-barred avenues for relief.
Roger Davie of Davie & Valdez P.C., has over 35 years of experience practicing employment law in Texas and New Mexico. If you have questions or need help with an issue with your employer, reach out to us today.
Note: This post summarizes recent developments and is not legal advice. Speak with a lawyer about your situation.