Adams v. Dept. of Defense

2 Citing cases

  1. Adams v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd.

    651 F. App'x 993 (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    Adams contends that he was denied a pin and certificate for recognition of 30 years of government service, could not take use-or-lose leave, was denied certain benefits others were receiving, was subjected to internal investigations, was terminated for charging his cell phone, and was lied to about his going-away party. The circumstances of the revocation of Mr. Adams's security clearance and his subsequent removal were considered by this court in Adams v. Dep't of Def., 371 F. App'x 93 (Fed. Cir. 2010). On May 26, 2015, Mr. Adams filed an appeal with the Board.

  2. Adams v. Dep't of Def.

    688 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2012)   Cited 18 times
    Stating that neither the Federal Circuit, nor the Board, has authority to review a charge that retaliation and discrimination were the reasons for revocation of a security clearance

    On appeal this court affirmed. Adams v. Dep't of Defense, 371 Fed.Appx. 93 (Fed.Cir.2010)( Adams I ). The court held that the agency had afforded Mr. Adams the required minimal procedural protections, recognizing that review of security issues by the MSPB and the Federal Circuit is limited to review of the agency's procedures and applying the Court's ruling in Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 529, 108 S.Ct. 818, 98 L.Ed.2d 918 (1988), that “protection of classified information must be committed to the broad discretion of the agency responsible, and this must include broad discretion to determine who may have access to it.” In Egan the Court held that review of an agency's decision related to security clearance is limited to determining whether minimal due process protections were provided, id. at 531, 108 S.Ct. 818, and that the grant or revocation of a security clearance “is committed by law to the appropriate agency of the executive branch,” id. at 527, 108 S.Ct. 818.