No. 23-889

In Re William B. Jolley

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2024-02-20
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: administrative-judges administrative-law constitutional-appointment due-process equal-protection merit-systems-protection-board mspb-procedure veterans veterans-rights whistleblower whistleblower-protection
Latest Conference: 2024-04-12 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

I
Do Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) decisions of Veteran and
Whistleblower appeals fail for lack of "due process " where 5 C.F.R. f 1201.57(d),
states "the Board will not consider matters described at 5 U.S.C. f 7701(c)(2) in
an appeal covered by this section. "?

II
Did the ultra vires act of two individual MSPB Board members creating the so called
"Ratification Order " stating, "we today approve these appointments as our own under Article II
of the Constitution, " satisfy the Supreme Court requirements for administrative judges as set
forth by the Supreme Court in Lucia v. SEC, et. seq. (App.7)

III
Should 38 U.S.C. ^ 4324 (App.3) be declared unconstitutional because it creates unequal
protection of laws for Veterans from that which is provided by 38 U.S.C. f 4323. (App.4)

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Due process-violation-in-MSPB-appeals

Docket Entries

2024-04-15
Petition DENIED.
2024-03-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2024.
2024-03-14
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-02-20
Motion (23M89) for leave to proceed as a veteran Granted.
2024-01-10
MOTION (23M89) DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2024-01-05
Motion (23M89) for leave to proceed as a veteran filed.
2024-01-05
Petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition filed. (Response due March 21, 2024)

Attorneys

United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
William B. Jolley
William B. Jolley — Petitioner