Debra L. Roth

About Ms. Roth

Ms. Roth’s practice focuses on representing federal executives and managers, and on representation of federal employees and law enforcement officers in Inspector General, internal, and congressional investigations. Ms. Roth’s practice also includes representing federal employees, applicants, and contractors in security clearance and suitability proceedings.

In addition, Ms. Roth and the law firm attorneys provide legal advice to and representation of small and medium sized  agencies on a multitude of federal personnel law and employment discrimination matters by assisting agencies with employee relations, EEO, and labor relations issues on sensitive or complex personnel matters for which a conflict of interest exists in the agency’s internal office of general counsel. This has included representation of agencies during appeals at the Merit Systems Protection Board, defense of EEO complaints, including litigating before the EEOC, and conducting misconduct or other management investigations, into integrity issues, violations of the agency’s rules of conduct and sexual harassment (Faragher and Ellerth) investigations.

Ms. Roth also provides legal services to small private sector employers on an array of employment matters including: federal anti-discrimination and civil rights laws; employment contracts; EEO training; civil rights investigations; and human resources policies and procedures.

Ms. Roth currently serves as General Counsel to the Senior Executives Association.

Ms. Roth has been retained at the expense of the U.S. Department of Justice to act as private defense counsel for a variety of federal employees sued personally in Bivens and Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 lawsuits when the Justice Department has determined a conflict exists with direct DOJ representation.  Her experience includes representation of Bureau of Prison guards and wardens, and federal law enforcement officers from across the federal law enforcement community.  The legal matters range from every-day law enforcement or prison security activities to past and recent matters involving national security or public interest.  Her representation of federal employees in these legal matters has been in the federal district and appellate courts, as well as the U.S. Supreme Court.

Ms. Roth is also a frequent lecturer, sharing her specialized knowledge and experience on federal employment law at conferences and seminars designed for federal supervisors, executives, and employee relations professionals. In addition to being a frequent lecturer, she serves as an Advisory Board member on the Federal Dispute Resolution training conference which is a premiere annual conference on federal personnel law. Ms. Roth also appears on a variety of radio shows and regularly hosts the law firm’s podcast FEDtalk on Federal News Network.

Ms. Roth also appeared on 60 Minutes with CBS News Correspondent Norah O’Donnell for an investigative report into the vacancies at the Merit Systems Protection Board.  Ms. Roth provided critical insight into the Board’s functioning and purpose, and discussed the impact on the functioning of government and the federal workforce because of the historic length of the lack of quorum at the Board.

Areas of Practice

• Federal Personnel and Employment Law

• Private Sector Employers

• Federal Agency (GSA Schedule) Legal Services

• Security Clearances

• Bivens Representation

• FOIA and Privacy Act

• Employment Law Training

• Association Law

Speeches & Presentations

• Panelist, Federal Circuit Bar Association, September 2, 2021, Best Practices in Litigating Chapter 43 Performance-Based Actions

• Presenter, D.C. Bar Federal Personnel Law Series/Investigations – 2011, 2012, 2013, 2016, 2019.

• Presentation, National Council of Social Security Management Associations 49th Annual Meeting, September 25, 2018: State of the Federal Civil Service Personnel System 40 years later.

• Panelist, Heritage Foundation on the Hill, June 4, 2018: Rightsizing Government – How congress can give federal agencies the authority they need, Session One: Excessive Obstacles to Firing Federal employees.

• Panelist, Judicial Conference of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, March 16, 2018, Civil Service Reform: Glimpses of a Path Forward?

• Panelist, American Bar Association Section of Labor and Employment Law, Federal Sector Labor and Employment Law Committee, midyear meeting February 2018, Merit Systems Protection Board Update session.

Significant Cases

• Court appointed Amicus Curiae in Santos v. National Aeronautics & Space Admin., 990 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (determining for the first time that an agency must prove the justification for the institution of a performance improvement plan when the agency predicates removal on the employee's unacceptable performance).

• Lovelien, et al. v. United States, et al., 422 F.Supp.3d 341 (D.D.C. 2019) (granting motion to dismiss Bivens suit bringing First and Fourth Amendment claims against BLM Special Agent-in-Charge of the 2014 Bunkerville, NV standoff); aff’d 853 F.App’x 676 (D.C. Cir. 2021).

• Co-lead counsel for Petitioner Helman in Helman v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 856 F.3d 920 (2017) (determining that portions of newly enacted personnel statute that prohibited presidentially appointed Members of the Merit System Protection Board from reviewing administrative judges' decisions violated the Appointments Clause to the U.S. Constitution).

• Represented Respondent Coffman in Special Counsel v. Coffman, 124 M.S.P.R. 130 (2017) (holding that the OSC is required to prove employee acted intentionally in committing allegedly unlawful hiring practices and not when the evidence only established negligence or error; and finding that Petitioner was selectively prosecuted by OSC).

• Co-represented Associate BOP Warden in Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017) in a landmark Bivens decision that called an end to an era in which the judiciary decides whether to extend a Bivens cause of action to “a new context” absent clear legislative intent to do so. (Declined to extend Bivens to the federal officials’ detention policy of foreign nationals detained as part of the U.S. government’s response to the September 11th attacks because the claims arose in a new Bivens context).

• Rubens v. Department of Veterans Affairs, MSPB No. PH-0707-16-0151-J-1, 2016 WL 526831 (Feb. 1, 2016) (reversing Deputy Secretary’s decision under newly enacted personnel statute to demote a Senior Executive Service Director to a General Schedule position).

• Co-represented Associate BOP Warden in Turkmen v. Hasty, 789 F.3d 218 (2d Cir. 2015), judgment rev'd in part, vacated in part sub nom. Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017) (precursor to Ziglar v. Abbasi: SCOTUS case addressing whether claims of improper treatment in confinement made by foreign nationals detained as part of the U.S. government’s response to the September 11th attacks could be brought in a Bivens cause of action).

• Prouty v. General Services Administration, 122 M.S.P.R. 117 (2014) (holding that the agency failed to produce evidence that GSA Senior Executives knew or had reasons to know of purchasing decisions made in the planning of an agency conference that provoked GSA conference scandal), citing Prouty v. Gen. Servs. Admin., M.S.P.B. Docket No. DE-0752-12-0396-I-1 (Mar. 11, 2013) (finding that OIG report constitutes summary, unsworn hearsay and is insufficient to support charges when the agency fails to submit evidence underlying the report).

• Co-represented INS District Director for New York City in Arar v. Ashcroft, 585 F.3d 559 (2d Cir. 2009) (en banc), cert. denied, 560 U.S. 978 (2010) (declining to recognize Bivens against the government officials who were allegedly complicit in the removal of a foreign national from the United States and his subsequent confinement in Syria).