United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

contradicted himself repeatedly, and merely signed the termination letter prepared
by headquarters officials with undisguised animus against MacLean.
The Board did not consider 21 Douglas factors for responsible penalty
selection, beyond reiterating irrelevant references to lack of remorse, and
statements without basis in the record about his intent. While it addressed
comparative discipline, it did not explain why distinctions were material with
others who intentionally released SSI, none whom were terminated.
The Board erroneously ignored the Code of Ethics for Government Service,
5 CFR Part 2635, to assess whether MacLean’s termination promoted the
efficiency of the service. That was imperative, because it also concluded that
MacLean acted in good faith to protect the country against a threat; he succeeded;
and the Agency’s only burden was the administrative effort to correct its mistake.
Nevertheless, it held that termination was justified, because as an individual he
challenged Agency leaders’ resource allocation. Because this balance flatly
contradicts the Code’s stated principles for federal employees, its ongoing
relevance must be clarified.
The Board erroneously failed to consider FAMS leadership’s obsessive
hostility toward MacLean, due to his co-founding a chapter and advocacy for
FLEOA just weeks after his 2003 disclosure, ironically to challenge Agency
leaders’ institutionalized security breaches. This activity was protected under the
23