Power Grab/Fire anyone who can stop him
OPM adds four essay questions to federal job applications, including one on advancing the president’s executive orders
A court stayed that question on September 11, 2026, and OPM replaced it a week later.
What happened
On May 29, 2025, the Office of Personnel Management and the Domestic Policy Council required four short essay questions on competitive-service vacancy announcements at GS-05 and above. The Merit Hiring Plan was issued under Executive Order 14170. One question asks how the applicant would “help advance the President’s Executive Orders and policy priorities.” Answers run 200 words or less.
OPM guidance of June 23, 2025 said the answers are not scored and “must not be used to impose an ideological litmus test.” Applicants who leave them blank are not screened out. The answers go to the hiring manager, and to agency leadership or a designee if the candidate is recommended for selection.
On September 11, 2026, Judge George O’Toole stayed the question in AFGE v. Kupor, finding it likely violated the First Amendment. He did not bar use of answers already submitted. On September 18, OPM told agencies not to consider prior responses and replaced the question.
Who benefited
The White House personnel operation gets a view of every career applicant’s stated alignment with the president’s agenda, at the point where agency leadership signs off on a hire. Hiring managers and political leadership see information the civil-service scoring process is not supposed to consider.
Who wanted something
The Domestic Policy Council co-issued the plan, which flowed from Executive Order 14170. OPM, under leadership installed in January 2025, wrote the questions and the guidance. The administration framed the plan as restoring merit and “commitment to American ideals.” OPM issued further guidance on the questions on April 30, 2026.
Who lost out
Applicants for career civil-service jobs had to write about advancing a particular president’s orders in order to apply. They could not know how an unscored answer was weighed by the leaders who saw it. The principle that career hiring is insulated from political tests was the rule at stake.
Why it matters
A court found the question likely violated the First Amendment, and OPM replaced it within a week. The question was unscored by rule but read by the people who decide. Whether answers influenced selections cannot be known from outside, and the court did not bar use of those already submitted.
Sources U.S. District Court, D. Mass. (via CourtListener) (primary)U.S. Office of Personnel Management (govDelivery) (primary)U.S. Office of Personnel Management (govDelivery) (primary)Government Executive