WASHINGTON - Marylandian -- Oral arguments have been scheduled for next month in the case of Anthony Perry vs Gina Raimondo, et. al, U.S. Department of Commerce.

Nathaniel A.G. Zelinsky, with Hogan Lovells, filed an amicus brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on behalf of Anthony Perry. The brief states the District Court erred when it declined to consider Perry's discrimination claims de novo against his former employer, the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Perry, who served as a Supervisory Information Technology Specialist with Commerce's Census Bureau, says officials trumped up charges against him. They then used a settlement agreement to pressure him into dropping EEO complaints against the department.

"After 29 years of dedicated federal service I was pressured into early retirement or face termination without a pension," said Perry.

More on Marylandian

• CCHR, a Mental Health Watchdog Organization, Hosts Weekly Events Educating Citizens on Important Mental Health Issues
• "Leading From Day One: The Essential Guide for New Supervisors" Draws from 25+ Years of International Management Experience
• New Slotozilla Project Explores What Happens When the World Goes Silent
• IASO Bio to Present Promising Findings on Equecabtagene Autoleucel for Multiple Sclerosis at both ANA and ECTRIMS 2025
• The Two Faces of Charles D. Braun: How the Novel, Posthumously Yours, Came to Life

After signing the agreement, Perry fought to have his case heard in judicial forums including the Merit Systems Protection Board and later the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. However, both claimed they had no jurisdiction to hear the case. Eventually, Perry made it to the Supreme Court.

In 2017, the Supreme Court ruled that judicial review of Perry's case rested in the district court. It sent the case back to the US District Court for the District of Columbia. Rather than review Perry's case, Presiding Judge Chutkan dismissed it. In 2022, Chutkan rejected the high court's ruling. On September 30, 2022, in a Memorandum of Opinion, Judge Chutkan opined:

"Unfortunately for Perry, this Court will not reach his discrimination claims either but instead will affirm the Merit Systems Protection Board's (MSPB or "Board") decision dismissing his claims for lack of jurisdiction."

More on Marylandian

• Goodwill Industries of the Chesapeake Celebrates Second Graduating Class from Excel Center, Baltimore's Tuition-Free Adult High School
• Counseling Center of New Smyrna Beach Expands Affordable Mental Health Services for Volusia County
• Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation (MALPH) Board of Trustees Meeting
• Athena Forge (ATFG) Introduces Advanced Token for Technology-Driven Financial Ecosystem
• Albuquerque's Z-CoiL Footwear Brings All-American Family Business Story to Shark Tank Season Premiere

David Grogan a retired supervisory deputy U.S. marshal who served in the U.S. Marine Corps, relates an account of a similar settlement. "I will attend the Perry case oral arguments," says Grogan, who led a $300 million lawsuit against the Justice Department. "Like Anthony Perry and many truth-telling employees, I was subjected to tremendous retaliation from my employer and forced to drop claims against the Department.

"Coalition For Change, Inc. (C4C) members applaud Anthony Perry's resolve to challenge government coercion," say Tanya Ward Jordan, C4C's President. " It is common for rogue federal officials to come up with settlement agreements and then use them to silence employees who report unlawful acts. MSPB and EEOC protection rarely extend to civil servants who are victimized and public safety is often compromised."

The oral argument is scheduled for 9:30 a.m., February 12, 2024, in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.