Category: Non-elected White House staff (Domestic Policy Council); presidentially appointed, never Senate-confirmed Role: Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy since January 2025, and in Trump’s first term the Domestic Policy Council’s lead adviser on civil service and labor policy; credited by the President and by NPR and New York Times reporting as the originator of Schedule F and of Executive Order 14410 (June 3, 2026), which moved about 8,000 senior career employees into at-will Schedule Policy/Career Priority: P2 (policy architect of the Schedule F / Schedule Policy/Career reclassification; documented official role, pending litigation against the policy, no finding of unlawful conduct against him)

Role

James Sherk is a Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy on the White House Domestic Policy Council (DPC), a post he returned to in January 2025 after serving in the same office during Trump’s first term [1][2]. The White House’s annual report to Congress on its staff lists “SHERK, JAMES B.” in that title at $121,500 a year as of July 1, 2026 [17]. His portfolio is the federal civil service: the rules that govern how career employees are classified, disciplined and removed. At the June 3, 2026 Oval Office signing of Executive Order 14410, which moved senior policy-influencing career positions into the at-will Schedule Policy/Career category, NPR described him as “the mastermind behind this plan,” and the New York Times reported that when the President asked whose idea it was, he was told it was Sherk’s [4][7]. That makes him the official most directly associated with the largest change to federal merit-system protections in this administration, which is why he is tracked here. His think-tank research is also the cited evidence in two 2026 OPM rules that carry the policy out, a reliance one pending lawsuit says OPM never disclosed [12][18][19].

Background

Before government, Sherk worked at the Heritage Foundation writing on labor and civil service policy; the New York Times reports that in 2014 he told lawmakers that federal law makes it “very difficult to separate federal employees from their jobs” [7]. He joined the first Trump White House’s Domestic Policy Council and served there as Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy; his America First Policy Institute (AFPI) biography describes him as the administration’s top civil service reform and labor policy adviser from 2017 to 2021 and the principal author or policy lead for about two dozen executive orders and presidential memoranda (a self-description) [13]. During the Biden administration he worked at AFPI, where a 2022 report he wrote again identified the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) as an obstacle to removing federal employees [1][7]. His AFPI report “Tales from the Swamp: How Federal Bureaucrats Resisted President Trump” (first issued in 2021; OPM cites a January 8, 2025 edition) catalogued career-staff resistance in the first term [12][18]. E&E News reports that in a 2022 Wall Street Journal op-ed he wrote that the Schedule F order “could — and should — be reissued by another president” [1]; Salon reports that a November 2022 Wall Street Journal op-ed of his advocated requiring federal employees to work in the office five days a week in the hope that some would leave voluntarily [16]. In 2023 he and former acting OPM Director Michael Rigas, both then at AFPI, publicly defended Schedule F against critics they called “hyperbolic” (Government Executive) [25].

Basis for Inclusion

Basis for Inclusion Subject classification: Non-elected federal official — Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, White House Domestic Policy Council (2017–2021 and January 2025 to present). Presidentially appointed White House staff, never Senate-confirmed and never elected. He is therefore tested under the Non-Speech Anchor Test (standards §5A). Non-Speech Anchor met: Anchor E (use of an official non-elected position). The anchor rests on a documented act in his official capacity, not on his title: he originated and led, as DPC staff, the policy that became Executive Order 14410, “Implementing Schedule Policy/Career in the Excepted Service” (signed June 3, 2026; Federal Register document 2026-11594), which transferred more than 4,800 positions held by about 8,000 career employees into a category without the adverse-action appeal protections of the competitive service [4][5][6][7]. NPR reported that the President invited him to speak at the signing as the plan’s “mastermind”; the New York Times reported that the President was told the idea was his and that, asked whether he had been very involved, Sherk answered “I was, sir” [4][7]. The policy is the subject of pending federal lawsuits (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility v. Trump, AFGE v. Trump, NTEU v. Trump, Government Accountability Project v. United States Office of Personnel Management) [6]. His first-term role in the original Schedule F order (Executive Order 13957) is corroborating context: E&E News and Politico report he was “central” to that effort [1][2]. Evidence basis: Executive Order 14410 (primary record) [5]; the White House’s July 1, 2026 staff report to Congress for his title (primary record) [17]; NPR and New York Times reporting naming him as the originator, including his own on-the-record answer at the signing [4][7]; E&E News / Politico on his first-term role [1][2]; Lawfare on the scope of the order and the pending suits [6]. Strip Test: Removing his public advocacy (Heritage papers, 2014 testimony, the 2022 AFPI report and Wall Street Journal op-ed, his remarks at the signing) leaves the record of an official act: a White House policy official leading the drafting of an executive order that was signed and published in the Federal Register. His answer “I was, sir” is used only as his own account of that act, not as speech under assessment. Result: passes. No court has made a finding about Sherk’s personal conduct; the anchor is leadership of an official policy that is itself in litigation, not a finding of wrongdoing. What is NOT the basis for inclusion: His views on the civil service, labor unions and presidential removal power; his think-tank writing and congressional testimony; his attendance at White House–DOGE–Postal Service meetings in 2025 (presence at a meeting is not an act); and his title or placement on the DPC are not the basis for inclusion. Protected speech documented in this profile: [A] Statements and speech documented in this profile are included for factual and historical context only. They are protected under the First Amendment and do not independently form the basis for inclusion.

Democratic Malice Assessment

Designation: None

Ideology vs. Malice determination: Sherk’s documented actions represent ideological policy positions pursued through legitimate executive authority. The Schedule F order of 2020 (EO 13957), its 2025 reinstatement (EO 14171), the 2026 implementing order (EO 14410), and OPM’s February 6, 2026 final rule (Federal Register 2026-02375, adopted after notice and comment) are executive orders and a regulation issued through the channels the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act provide [5][11][12]. Under the framework’s Ideology Safe Harbor, “executive orders within established constitutional authority” and “regulatory changes following APA notice-and-comment procedures” are classified as ideology regardless of how harmful their outcomes may be. Whether these orders exceed the President’s authority under the Civil Service Reform Act is the question now before the federal courts [6]; until a court rules that they do, the safe harbor applies as written. The policy’s effects on roughly 8,000 career employees, and critics’ warning that it will chill candid advice to political leadership [4], are serious, but they are outcomes of policy, not evidence of mechanism subversion. The two items added on 2026-10-25 do not change this: the hiring-freeze guidance he is reported to have written (Documented Action 4) implemented a presidential memorandum, and OPM’s reliance on his AFPI research (Documented Action 8) is OPM’s rulemaking conduct, which the Government Accountability Project is challenging in court as an APA defect.

The one reported action that could fall outside the safe harbor is the New York Times account (June 28, 2026) that Sherk led a private White House effort to influence the MSPB, an adjudicatory body, before its March 2026 ruling on presidential removal power [7]. That account rests on anonymous sources in a single outlet, and a White House official called the claim “categorically false.” It is therefore Alleged and not eligible for scoring (malice-evaluator §3). It is recorded in Documented Actions as a reported matter and in Open research leads. A court record, inspector general or congressional finding, sworn testimony, or independent corroboration by a second outlet with named sourcing would require this assessment to be reopened.

Framework note: The Democratic Malice Assessment evaluates subversion of democratic mechanisms themselves, not policy disagreement. Holding conservative, populist, or nationalist policy positions — even extreme ones — within constitutional process is ideology, not malice.

Framework disclosure: This Democratic Malice Assessment applies a published analytical framework to documented public actions by public officials. All factual predicates are cited to primary or secondary sources. This assessment is subject to update as new evidence emerges or prior evidence is corrected.

Legal Disclaimer

The Democratic Malice Assessment is an analytical framework applying defined criteria to documented public conduct. Designations are evaluative conclusions, not statements of criminal guilt. No DMS score constitutes a finding of criminal liability. The factual predicates are cited to primary sources; the evaluative conclusions are protected expression. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and its progeny apply to this assessment of a public figure’s public conduct.

Documented Actions

1. Internal DPC memo proposing a “Constitutional option” for removals (2017; made public June 2020)

SourceGovernment Executive, Erich Wagner, “White House Advisor Sought Legal Opinion to Allow Trump to Fire Anyone In Government,” June 25, 2020. https://www.govexec.com/management/2020/06/white-house-advisor-sought-legal-opinion-trump-can-fire-anyone-government/166445/Evidence: As a labor policy adviser on the Domestic Policy Council, Sherk wrote a 19-page internal memo, described by Government Executive as “an internal document from 2017,” that the New York Times first reported and that the Daily Beast and the Project on Government Oversight published in full in June 2020 [3]. The memo suggested the White House examine a “Constitutional option”: the theory that Article II gives the President power to dismiss any federal employee for any reason, and that civil service laws and union contracts that impede it are unconstitutional. “If so,” he wrote, “the president could issue an executive order outlining a streamlined new process for dismissing federal employees.” It also proposed curtailing collective bargaining, exempting the Defense Department from it, restricting union official time, and annual pay freezes. Government Executive reported that several of these ideas were carried into three 2018 executive orders on bargaining, official time and removals; others, such as retirement-benefit cuts, did not advance in Congress [3]. This is internal policy advice; it is recorded as the documented origin of the later removal-power policy, not as an act under assessment.

Pattern: Development of an expanded presidential removal power over career employees

2. First-term Schedule F effort (2019–2020)

SourceAxios, Jonathan Swan, “Trump’s revenge,” July 23, 2022. https://www.axios.com/2022/07/23/donald-trump-news-schedule-f-executive-orderEvidence: On October 21, 2020, President Trump issued Executive Order 13957, creating “Schedule F” in the excepted service for career positions of a “confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character,” removing them from the adverse-action protections of 5 U.S.C. chapter 75 [11]. E&E News and Politico reported in January 2025 that Sherk “was central to the Trump administration’s efforts” to make it easier to fire federal employees under Schedule F [1][2]. Axios (Jonathan Swan, July 23, 2022) gave the fullest origin account: in January 2019, working from the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, Sherk read through Title 5 of the U.S. Code looking for a way to let the President fire career officials and found it in 5 U.S.C. § 7511, which exempts from adverse-action protections positions “of a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making or policy-advocating character.” Axios reports that he concluded nothing in the wording limited it to political appointees, sent the idea to a lawyer in the White House Counsel’s Office, and over the following months worked “in secrecy” with a small group of political appointees and government lawyers on a draft completed by late spring 2019; career staff, Congress and the unions were not told, and the order was held through 2020 until Trump signed it on October 21, 2020 [15]. Axios put the number of career employees the order could reach at an estimated 50,000 [15]. President Biden revoked the order on January 22, 2021 (EO 14003), before positions were moved [11].

Pattern: Reclassification of career positions to remove merit-system removal protections

3. Return to the White House Domestic Policy Council (January 2025)

SourcePolitico, “Trump hires Fed-firing mastermind,” January 18, 2025. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/18/trump-hires-fed-firing-mastermind-00199154Evidence: E&E News and Politico reported on January 18, 2025 that Sherk would rejoin the White House as Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy on the DPC [1][2]. On January 20, 2025, the President signed Executive Order 14171, “Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions Within the Federal Workforce,” reinstating EO 13957 with amendments and renaming the category “Schedule Policy/Career” [11]. Sherk’s personal role in drafting EO 14171 is not established by the sources read in this pass. Government Executive’s report on the January 2025 hiring freeze named “Domestic Policy Council advisor James Sherk,” with OMB Director-designate Russ Vought, among the first-term officials who drove workforce-reduction efforts and were “slated to return to the fold” [20].

Pattern: Reappointment of the first-term civil service policy lead

4. Reported authorship of the OPM–OMB hiring-freeze guidance (January 2025)

SourceSalon, Russell Payne, “Right-wing activists appear to be writing memos for the Trump White House,” January 28, 2025. https://www.salon.com/2025/01/28/right-wing-activists-appear-to-be-writing-memos-for-theEvidence: On January 20, 2025, OPM and OMB issued “Federal Civilian Hiring Freeze Guidance” to agency heads, signed by Acting OMB Director Matthew J. Vaeth and Acting OPM Director Charles Ezell [24]. Salon reported on January 28, 2025 that the document’s metadata, as first posted on OPM’s website, listed Sherk as its author, and that the administration then replaced the files with copies listing different authors; journalist Molly White preserved the originals [16]. In this pass the copy now on OPM’s site was read directly: its metadata names “United States Office of Personnel Management” as author, with a creation date of January 21, 2025 and a modification date of January 28, 2025, and the earliest Wayback Machine capture of that URL (January 30, 2025) is the same replaced file [24]. The original file was not retrieved, so the authorship attribution rests on Salon’s and White’s review [NEEDS VERIFICATION — 2026-10-25]. The same Salon report attributed the companion return-to-office guidance to Noah Peters, not to Sherk [16]. Writing guidance in his DPC role would be an official act; it is recorded here as reported, not as established.

Pattern: White House policy staff drafting agency personnel guidance

5. White House–DOGE meetings on the Postal Service (March–May 2025)

SourceGovernment Executive, Eric Katz, “DOGE holds meetings with White House, new postal leadership and Treasury to discuss reforming USPS,” June 20, 2025. https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/06/white-house-holds-meetings-new-postal-leadership-doge-and-treasury-discuss-reforming-usps/406202/Evidence: Government Executive reported, based on internal documents, that after Postmaster General Louis DeJoy resigned in March 2025, interim USPS leadership held a series of meetings with DOGE team members Alex Simonpour and Ethan Shaotran on pricing and reform, and that in May 2025 White House senior policy adviser Clark Milner organized a meeting with DOGE, including its chief attorney James Burnham, and members of the Domestic Policy Council, including Sherk [8]. The Revolving Door Project describes the meetings as having expanded to include Burnham and Sherk, “a White House official involved in reduction in force efforts” [9]. Neither source reports what Sherk proposed or decided. Attendance is documented as context for his portfolio; it is not an action assessed in this profile. For the Postal Service leadership, see David Steiner — Postmaster General and CEO, U.S. Postal Service; for DOGE’s general counsel, see the draft james-burnham-profile.

Pattern: White House and DOGE involvement in independent-agency restructuring

6. Reported private effort to influence the Merit Systems Protection Board (November 2025 – March 2026)

SourceThe New York Times, “White House Secretly Swayed Board Meant to Stop Civil Service Politicization,” June 28, 2026. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/28/us/politics/trump-firings-workers-merit-systems-protection-board.htmlEvidence: According to the New York Times (June 28, 2026), citing people with knowledge of the matter, the White House ran a public and private pressure campaign on the MSPB — the quasi-judicial board that hears federal employees’ appeals of removals — before the board ruled in March 2026, in the consolidated cases of immigration judges Megan Jackler and Brandon Jaroch, that it could consider the President’s Article II removal-power arguments, a departure from long precedent that the full Federal Circuit later agreed to review [7]. The Times reported that the private effort was led by Sherk, and that he was among White House officials who met the board’s acting chair, Henry Kerner, on November 21 at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, where officials conveyed that the board was bound to follow a Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinion on Article II cases. A White House official told the Times the meeting’s primary purpose was to interview Kerner for a possible nomination as permanent chair and called the claim of a push against the board “categorically false”; the White House declined to make Sherk available [7]. Allegedly, then, Sherk led an effort to influence an adjudicatory body’s ruling; this rests on anonymous sourcing in one outlet and is not independently corroborated as of 2026-10-25. The commentary that followed (Don Moynihan’s Can We Still Govern?, Talking Points Memo’s Morning Memo, and the San Antonio Employment Law Blog) restates the Times account and adds no new sourcing, so it is not corroboration [7]. On June 17, 2026 the full Federal Circuit granted the judges’ request for an expedited en banc hearing of Jackler v. Department of Justice, the appeal of the MSPB ruling (Government Executive) [23]; the outcome of that appeal was not found in this pass.

Pattern: Reported executive pressure on an independent adjudicatory board (alleged; disputed by the White House)

7. Executive Order 14410 — Implementing Schedule Policy/Career (June 3, 2026)

SourceFederal Register, Executive Order 14410, “Implementing Schedule Policy/Career in the Excepted Service,” June 10, 2026 (document 2026-11594). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-06-10/html/2026-11594.htmEvidence: On June 3, 2026, the President signed Executive Order 14410, “Implementing Schedule Policy/Career in the Excepted Service,” published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2026 (document 2026-11594) [5]. Its 229-page appendix transferred more than 4,800 positions, held by about 8,000 employees, into Schedule Policy/Career, building on OPM’s February 6, 2026 final rule (Federal Register 2026-02375), under which reclassified employees lose chapter 75 adverse-action appeal rights [5][6][12]. NPR reported that the President “invited White House aide James Sherk, the mastermind behind this plan, to say a few words,” and quoted him: “What this does is basically treats those employees like private-sector workers,” adding that employees who are “messing up” can “be removed quickly rather than taking a year or longer” [4]. The New York Times reported that the President asked whose idea the order was, was told it was Sherk’s, and that Sherk answered “I was, sir” when asked whether he had been very involved [7]. Time and The New Republic, both on June 4, 2026, quote the same remarks from the same Oval Office ceremony [21][22]. The Government Accountability Project’s amended complaint, citing the White House video of the signing, says he confirmed there that he was “very much involved” in the order and that the President told him, “You did a great job on this” [18]. The order is challenged in pending litigation, including Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility v. Trump (D. Md., No. 8:25-cv-00260), American Federation of Government Employees v. Trump (D.D.C., No. 1:25-cv-00264), National Treasury Employees Union v. Trump (D.D.C., No. 1:25-cv-00170) and Government Accountability Project v. United States Office of Personnel Management (D.D.C., No. 1:25-cv-00347) [6][14]. No merits ruling in any of these suits was found in this pass.

Pattern: Reclassification of senior career positions to at-will status; expansion of presidential control over the career civil service

8. His think-tank research as the cited basis for OPM rules (February–August 2026)

SourceU.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Government Accountability Project v. United States Office of Personnel Management, No. 1:25-cv-00347-PLF, Amended Complaint (Doc. 37), filed June 24, 2026, ¶ 113. Docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69617919/government-accountability-project-v-united-states-office-of-personnel/Evidence: OPM’s February 6, 2026 final rule creating Schedule Policy/Career cites Sherk’s AFPI report Tales from the Swamp (the January 8, 2025 edition) as support for its account of career-staff resistance in the first term, and cites a 2022 AFPI paper by Sherk and Jacob Sagert arguing that at-will employment in Mississippi’s career service improved state government [12]. On June 24, 2026 the Government Accountability Project and its co-plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in Government Accountability Project v. United States Office of Personnel Management (D.D.C., No. 1:25-cv-00347-PLF, assigned to Judge Paul L. Friedman), alleging at paragraph 113 that OPM “drew extensively upon” the report “without acknowledging that the report’s author, James Sherk, is now a member of the White House Domestic Policy Council and a key architect of Schedule P/C,” and that this reliance is part of why the rule lacks reasoned decision-making [18]. Sherk is not a defendant; the claim is against OPM under the Administrative Procedure Act. On August 3, 2026 OPM published a final rule, “Reduction in Force Appeals” (effective September 2, 2026; docket OPM-2025-0239), that moves appeals of reduction-in-force separations, demotions and long furloughs from the MSPB to OPM and bars grievance arbitration of them; to justify cutting out arbitrators, it cites “multiple studies” showing that the Federal Labor Relations Authority overturns arbitral awards at a high rate, the first being Sherk’s 2023 AFPI paper “Federal Union Arbitrators Frequently Misapply the Law” [19]. The citations are OPM’s acts, not his; they are recorded because they show the research he wrote outside government supplying the stated rationale for rules his office’s policy produced.

Pattern: Author’s advocacy research adopted as the record for the rules implementing his policy

Pattern Analysis

Cross-References

Sherk’s record is a single policy line pursued for more than a decade: from Heritage testimony (2014), to the internal “Constitutional option” memo (2017), to Schedule F (2020), to AFPI advocacy for its reissue (2022), to the 2026 implementing order, and into the OPM rules of February and August 2026, which cite his AFPI research as their evidence. Unlike most profiles in this category, his documented conduct is authorship of policy rather than its enforcement against named individuals; the record read in this pass does not tie him to any specific removal. The one reported departure from ordinary policymaking — the alleged private pressure on the MSPB — is the item that would change this profile’s assessment if corroborated. The broader policy and its legal challenges are tracked in Schedule F — Civil Service Purge Policy Tracker. OMB Director Russell Vought – Director, Office of Management and Budget and OPM Director Scott Kupor — OPM Director and a16z Pipeline carry the budget and personnel-agency implementation; the President’s orders are profiled at Donald Trump — 45th and 47th President of the United States; DOGE’s workforce actions are at DOGE — Department of Government Efficiency Policy Tracker; OPM’s institutional record is in the draft office-of-personnel-management.

Related profiles:

• russell-vought-profile (OMB implementation of Schedule Policy/Career and workforce reductions)
• scott-kupor-doge-profile (OPM Director; OPM issued the Schedule Policy/Career rule and spoke for the administration on EO 14410 [6][12])
• james-burnham-profile (draft; DOGE counsel at the 2025 Postal Service meetings)

Related skills:

• malice-evaluator (Ideology Safe Harbor applied to executive orders and APA rulemaking)
• patriot-private-citizen-inclusion-gate (Anchor E test for non-confirmed White House staff)

Severity Assessment

Immediate harm: Moderate — about 8,000 career employees lost adverse-action appeal protections under EO 14410; no removal of a named employee is tied to Sherk in the record read here. Democratic erosion: High — the policy he originated restructures the merit system that separates career administration from political control, and critics, including University of Michigan professor Don Moynihan, warn it will chill candid advice to political leadership [4]; its lawfulness is in litigation. Authoritarian marker: Moderate — expansion of presidential removal power over career officials (documented); reported pressure on an adjudicatory board (alleged only, denied by the White House).

Accountability Status

Current status: Active (Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, White House Domestic Policy Council), confirmed by the White House staff report to Congress as of July 1, 2026 [17]; no report of a departure after that date was found in this pass.

Legal exposure:

• None identified. The documented actions are the drafting of executive orders and policy; the lawsuits challenge the orders and OPM’s rule under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Civil Service Reform Act and seek relief against the government, not against Sherk personally. No statute is tied to a documented personal act. If the alleged MSPB contacts were corroborated, the relevant question would be improper influence on an adjudicatory proceeding under the MSPB’s statutory independence (5 U.S.C. § 1204), not a criminal statute.

Congressional oversight:

• House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (civil service, Schedule F/Policy-Career, OPM)
• Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (federal workforce, MSPB, OPM)

Public accountability:

• Pending suits against Schedule Policy/Career: Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility v. Trump (D. Md.), AFGE v. Trump (D.D.C.), NTEU v. Trump (D.D.C.), Government Accountability Project v. United States Office of Personnel Management (D.D.C.) [6].
• Court records (CourtListener): the pre-fetched full-text name search (retrieved 2026-10-15, filed after January 20, 2025) returned 8 dockets in which his name appears somewhere in the docket text, including the four suits above, NTEU v. Trump (D.D.C., No. 1:25-cv-00935), U.S. Department of Treasury v. NTEU Chapter 73 (E.D. Ky., No. 2:25-cv-00049), AFGE v. Trump (N.D. Cal., No. 3:25-cv-03070) and State of California v. United States (N.D. Cal., No. 4:25-cv-04966). He is not a listed party in any of them; how his name appears was not read for seven of them [14]. In the eighth, Government Accountability Project v. United States Office of Personnel Management, the June 24, 2026 amended complaint names him as the author of the AFPI report OPM relied on (Documented Action 8); the docket was re-checked on CourtListener on 2026-10-25 (D.D.C., No. 1:25-cv-00347, Judge Paul L. Friedman, filed February 6, 2025, open) [18]. RECAP mirrors PACER only partially, so this is unverified, not a complete litigation record.
• Coverage: Government Executive, E&E News / Politico, NPR, the New York Times, Lawfare; organizational monitoring by the Government Accountability Project, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, federal-employee unions, and the Revolving Door Project.

Open research leads

• New York Times, June 28, 2026: corroborate the MSPB account with a second outlet or primary record (MSPB acting chair Henry Kerner; the OLC opinion conveyed at the November 21 meeting; the Jackler/Jaroch consolidated ruling). As of 2026-10-25 every follow-up found restates the Times.
• Jackler v. Department of Justice (Fed. Cir., en banc, granted June 17, 2026): the briefs and any decision, and whether either side’s filings address the November 21 meeting.
• Hiring-freeze guidance metadata: obtain the original January 2025 OPM file that Molly White preserved and read its author field directly; the copy now on OPM’s site was replaced on January 28, 2025 (Documented Action 4).
• Government Executive, June 2025: what Sherk and Burnham contributed to Postal Service “reform.”
• OPM’s Schedule Policy/Career rulemaking record (OPM-2025-0004, Regulations.gov) and Sherk’s role in drafting it and EO 14171; the OPM reduction-in-force appeals docket (OPM-2025-0239) for any comment or drafting role of his.
• Government Accountability Project v. United States Office of Personnel Management (D.D.C., No. 1:25-cv-00347-PLF): OPM’s answer or administrative record on its reliance on Tales from the Swamp; any ruling.
• NTEU’s November 2025 records suit against OPM over Schedule F/Policy-Career records (Government Executive, November 17, 2025): whether released records show the DPC’s role in choosing positions.
• White House financial disclosure (OGE Form 278e) and prior employer ties (Heritage Foundation; America First Policy Institute).
• His part in the 2025 reduction-in-force actions.
• The full 2017 memo (Project on Government Oversight / Daily Beast publication) and his role in the May 2018 executive orders on bargaining, official time and removals.
• Declarations or exhibits in the Schedule Policy/Career suits that cite his memo or statements.

Truth and Reconciliation Considerations

Investigation priorities

1. Establish who selected the more than 4,800 positions in EO 14410’s appendix, on what criteria, and what role the DPC and Sherk played relative to OPM and OMB.
2. Determine whether White House officials, including Sherk, communicated with MSPB members about pending cases before the March 2026 ruling, and what was said at the November 21 meeting with the acting chair.
3. Document any removals of employees in Schedule Policy/Career positions and whether any followed disagreement with political leadership on policy or factual findings.
4. Trace the drafting history from the 2017 memo through EO 13957, EO 14171, OPM’s 2026 rule and EO 14410, including legal advice received on the “Constitutional option.”
5. Identify what workforce actions were discussed in the 2025 White House–DOGE–Postal Service meetings he attended.

Testimony value

Sherk is positioned to describe, from the inside, how the removal-power policy was conceived and carried across two administrations: the legal theories considered and rejected, the advice of the White House Counsel and the Office of Legal Counsel, how positions were chosen for reclassification, and whether any contact with the MSPB was intended to shape a pending ruling. His testimony would also clarify the division of labor among the DPC, OMB and OPM in implementing the policy.

Institutional reform

• Codify in statute that career positions cannot be moved out of the competitive service’s adverse-action protections by executive order, closing the 5 U.S.C. § 7511 “policy-determining” exception to career staff.
• Require public notice, position-by-position justification and a congressional reporting period before any mass reclassification of career positions.
• Prohibit and require disclosure of ex parte contacts between White House staff and MSPB members on pending appeals, with inspector general review.
• Strengthen the MSPB’s quorum and tenure protections so that adjudicatory independence does not depend on an acting chair’s nomination prospects.

Cross-References

Skills: malice-evaluator, patriot-private-citizen-inclusion-gate, accountability-profile-builder, public-records-research-specialist

Related profiles: Russell Vought – Director, Office of Management and Budget, Scott Kupor — OPM Director and a16z Pipeline, Donald Trump — 45th and 47th President of the United States, DOGE — Department of Government Efficiency Policy Tracker, David Steiner — Postmaster General and CEO, U.S. Postal Service, james-burnham-profile (draft)

Topics: Schedule F — Civil Service Purge Policy Tracker, office-of-personnel-management (draft), Schedule Policy/Career, Executive Order 14410, Merit Systems Protection Board, federal civil service, presidential removal power

Investigative trail pointers (public records)

Education only — verify independently. Absence of hits is not proof.

Use public-records-research-specialist, corporate-intelligence-investigator, and public-corruption-ombudsman evidence tiers.

Factual correction requests: If you believe information in this profile is incorrect, please contact factcheck@citizenanalyst.ai with your name (optional), the specific claim, and any supporting documentation. We review all submissions and correct verified errors promptly.

Sources

1. E&E News by POLITICO, Robin Bravender, “Trump hires fed-firing mastermind,” January 18, 2025. https://www.eenews.net/articles/trump-hires-fed-firing-mastermind/
2. Politico, “Trump hires Fed-firing mastermind,” January 18, 2025 (same report). https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/18/trump-hires-fed-firing-mastermind-00199154
3. Government Executive, Erich Wagner, “White House Advisor Sought Legal Opinion to Allow Trump to Fire Anyone In Government,” June 25, 2020. https://www.govexec.com/management/2020/06/white-house-advisor-sought-legal-opinion-trump-can-fire-anyone-government/166445/
4. NPR, Andrea Hsu, “Trump signs executive order that makes it easier to fire federal employees,” June 4, 2026. https://www.npr.org/2026/06/04/nx-s1-5845444/trump-signs-executive-order-that-makes-it-easier-to-fire-federal-employees (also carried by Texas Public Radio at https://www.tpr.org/2026-06-04/trump-signs-executive-order-that-makes-it-easier-to-fire-federal-employees and Maine Public at https://www.mainepublic.org/2026-06-04/trump-signs-executive-order-that-makes-it-easier-to-fire-federal-employees)
5. Federal Register, Executive Order 14410, “Implementing Schedule Policy/Career in the Excepted Service,” signed June 3, 2026, published June 10, 2026 (document 2026-11594). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-06-10/html/2026-11594.htm
6. Lawfare, “Inside the Implementation of Schedule Policy/Career,” June 2026. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/inside-the-implementation-of-schedule-policy-career
7. The New York Times, “White House Secretly Swayed Board Meant to Stop Civil Service Politicization,” June 28, 2026. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/28/us/politics/trump-firings-workers-merit-systems-protection-board.html
8. Government Executive, Eric Katz, “DOGE holds meetings with White House, new postal leadership and Treasury to discuss reforming USPS,” June 20, 2025. https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/06/white-house-holds-meetings-new-postal-leadership-doge-and-treasury-discuss-reforming-usps/406202/
9. Revolving Door Project, “DOGE: From Meme to Government Erosion Machine,” January 2026 (USPS section; _sources/general/revolving-door-project-doge-from-meme-to-government-erosion-machine-revolving-do.md).
10. The White House, “Implementing Schedule Policy/Career in the Excepted Service,” June 3, 2026. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/06/implementing-schedule-policy-career-in-the-excepted-service/
11. Executive Order 13957, “Creating Schedule F in the Excepted Service,” October 21, 2020; Executive Order 14003, “Protecting the Federal Workforce,” January 22, 2021; Executive Order 14171, “Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions Within the Federal Workforce,” January 20, 2025 (as summarized in Schedule F — Civil Service Purge Policy Tracker).
12. Federal Register, Office of Personnel Management, “Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service,” final rule, February 6, 2026 (document 2026-02375). https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/02/06/2026-02375/improving-performance-accountability-and-responsiveness-in-the-civil-service
13. America First Policy Institute, “James Sherk” (staff biography). https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/team/jamessherk
14. CourtListener RECAP full-text search for “James Sherk,” filed after January 20, 2025, retrieved October 15, 2026 (8 dockets; subject not a listed party in any). docs/bulk-update-2026-10-14/courtlistener/james-sherk-profile.json
15. Axios, Jonathan Swan, “Trump’s revenge” (Inside Trump ’25), July 23, 2022 (read via the Wayback Machine, 2026-10-25; the live page returned a bot wall). https://www.axios.com/2022/07/23/donald-trump-news-schedule-f-executive-order
16. Salon, Russell Payne, “Right-wing activists appear to be writing memos for the Trump White House,” January 28, 2025. https://www.salon.com/2025/01/28/right-wing-activists-appear-to-be-writing-memos-for-the
17. Executive Office of the President, “Annual Report to Congress on White House Office Personnel,” as of July 1, 2026 (entry “SHERK, JAMES B.,” $121,500 per annum, Special Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy). https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/2026-Annual-Report-to-Congress-on-White-House-Staff.pdf
18. Government Accountability Project v. United States Office of Personnel Management, No. 1:25-cv-00347-PLF (D.D.C.), Amended Complaint, Doc. 37, filed June 24, 2026, ¶ 113 and nn. 35–36 (copy hosted by Protect Democracy: https://protectdemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Amended-Complaint.pdf). Docket verified on CourtListener 2026-10-25 (docket 69617919; Judge Paul L. Friedman; filed February 6, 2025): https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69617919/government-accountability-project-v-united-states-office-of-personnel/
19. Federal Register, Office of Personnel Management, “Reduction in Force Appeals,” final rule, August 3, 2026, 91 FR 49230 (document 2026-15666; docket OPM-2025-0239; effective September 2, 2026), n. 24. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/08/03/2026-15666/reduction-in-force-appeals
20. Government Executive, Eric Katz, “Trump to again freeze federal hiring,” January 20, 2025. https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2025/01/trump-again-freeze-federal-hiring/402335/
21. Time, “Trump Makes It Easier to Fire Thousands of Federal Workers,” June 4, 2026. https://time.com/article/2026/06/04/trump-executive-order-schedule-policy-career-classification-fire-federal-workers-at-will
22. The New Republic, “Trump Just Made It Easier to Fire Thousands of Federal Employees,” June 4, 2026. https://newrepublic.com/post/211370/trump-ordr-easier-fire-federal-employees
23. Government Executive, Erich Wagner, “In rare move, full appeals court agrees to hear case challenging Trump’s ‘Article II’ firings,” June 17, 2026. https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2026/06/rare-move-full-appeals-court-agrees-hear-case-challenging-trumps-article-ii-firings/414257/
24. U.S. Office of Management and Budget and U.S. Office of Personnel Management, “Federal Civilian Hiring Freeze Guidance,” memorandum, January 20, 2025 (PDF as hosted by OPM; metadata read 2026-10-25: Author “United States Office of Personnel Management,” created January 21, 2025, modified January 28, 2025; earliest Wayback capture January 30, 2025). https://www.opm.gov/media/zkebfxow/omb-opm-federal-civilian-hiring-freeze-guidance-1-20-2025-final.pdf
25. Government Executive, “Schedule F architects say the plan’s critics are ‘hyperbolic,'” June 2023. https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2023/06/schedule-f-architects-plans-critics-hyperbolic/388118

Last Updated: 2026-10-25 Profile Status: Draft Next Review: Quarterly