Filed Date: Oct. 21, 2025
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This case challenged the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) revocation of a career Financial Analyst’s security clearance, allegedly in retaliation for expressing protected political views about the 2020 presidential election.
In February 2021, the analyst privately voiced concerns regarding election irregularities and potential legal challenges. Following this, the FBI suspended her, citing concerns about vulnerability to manipulation related to her political views and alleged belief in conspiracy theories. In June 2021, the FBI formally revoked her clearance, accusing her of promoting unfounded conspiratorial beliefs linked to “QAnon-influenced social media.” They claimed that she failed to renounce these views during an internal investigation. The FBI also allegedly disregarded her requests for discovery and withheld relevant records for more than three years during her appeals process.
On October 22, 2025, the former FBI analyst filed suit against the FBI, U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the respective leaders of these agencies, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida – Fort Myers Division. Plaintiff brought claims under the First and Fifth Amendments, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and the Back Pay Act. Plaintiff sought declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief, as well as attorneys’ fees. This case was assigned to Judge Kyle C. Dudek.
In her complaint, Plaintiff alleged that defendants (i) violated the First Amendment by retaliating against her and revoking her security clearance based on her political beliefs; (ii) violated the Fifth Amendment by depriving her of employment and permanently stigmatizing her professional reputation through false and shifting justifications, without providing procedural due process; and (iii) violated the APA by acting arbitrarily, capriciously, and contrary to law in the security clearance process, including relying on shifting and unsupported justifications and failing to follow required procedures under Executive Order 12968. She further sought relief under the Back Pay Act, All Writs Act, and Mandamus Act to obtain full back pay, prevent evasion of judicial review, and compel the FBI to recognize her as having retired in good standing, respectively.
This case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Dahlia Gottlieb (12/3/2025)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71712631/parties/reilly-v-bondi/
Kuchta, John David (Florida)
Wilson, Desiree (Florida)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71712631/reilly-v-bondi/
Last updated July 3, 2026, 4:28 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: Oct. 21, 2025
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Plaintiff was a career Financial Analyst’s at the Federal Bureau of Investigations.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Federal
Acting Attorney General of the United States
Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation
The United States of America
Defendant Type(s):
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Constitutional Clause(s):
Due Process: Procedural Due Process
Other Dockets:
Middle District of Florida 2:25-cv-00950
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General/Misc.:
Discrimination Area:
Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc.)
Case Summary of Reilly v. Bondi, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/47082/ (last updated 12/3/2025).