On Friday, a D.C. judge terminated the 1981 Luevano Consent Decree, which had barred the federal government from using skills-based tests to evaluate job applicants, potentially reshaping federal hiring practices.
The decree stemmed from a lawsuit by Angel Luevano, who argued that the Professional and Administrative Career Examination (PACE) disproportionately excluded Black and Hispanic applicants.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM), under President Jimmy Carter, agreed to pause the test for five years, but the restriction persisted for 44 years.
The Trump administration challenged the decree in January 2025, arguing it was outdated, especially after recent Supreme Court rulings against affirmative action.
Impact of the Decree and Its Reversal
For decades, the Luevano Consent Decree forced federal agencies to rely on self-assessments, where applicants rated their own skills without verification, leading to concerns about inflated claims and inconsistent hiring standards.
OPM Director Scott Kupor told The Daily Wire that this system hindered the government’s ability to hire qualified candidates, comparing it to a college ignoring SAT scores.
The decree’s reliance on the “disparate impact” theory—that racially unbalanced outcomes indicate bias—prevented objective testing, affecting the quality of hires across all groups.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon and OPM General Counsel Andrew Kloster, representing the government, emphasized that no concessions were made to end the decree, with Kloster noting, “Disparate impact as a way to measure things is not the law of the land anymore.”
The termination allows agencies to adopt technocratic assessments, such as coding tests for programmers, to rank applicants objectively.
Potential for Improved Federal Workforce
The end of the decree opens the door for merit-based hiring, which Kupor said could transform the federal workforce into a “high-performance culture.”
He highlighted the potential for better public service, stating, “Americans may start getting better service at government agencies, with government being more helpful and responsive.”
While a general aptitude test is under consideration, specific job categories are likely to implement tailored exams.
Critics of the old system argued it fostered randomness or favoritism, contrary to the decree’s intent to ensure fairness.
The move, described by Kupor as “a win for fairness,” aims to attract skilled candidates and reduce bias through objective standards, potentially enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of federal agencies.
