Damian R. Nastri v. Department of Homeland Security

Can the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (hereafter MSPB, or Board); make decisions; solicit, hire, promote, transfer, reassign, or fire staff; select, refer, refuse, adjudicate or dismiss cases; retain in-house counsel; represent itself in Court and argue the position of the Board; have counsel serve as counsel to themselves, or concurrently serve as the chief executive of the Board, counsel for the chief executive and Board, Inspector General functional oversight for themselves and over the Board; or, be enabled to or otherwise obstruct due process or otherwise deprive the civil rights or civil liberties of complainants or other appellants - without any operable quorum of the Board; or, in the absence of any Presidentially-appointed and Senate-confirmed leader of the Board; or, without any Member thereof? And, notwithstanding, or in the alternative, arguendo the Board was not insolvent or operating ultra vires, do this Court's holdings in McCulloch v. Sociedad Nacional de Marineros de Honduras, 72 U.S. 10 (1963)1, Walker v. Southern Ry., 385 U.S. 196, 87 S. Ct. 365,17 L. Ed. 2d 294 [1966],2 as well as the 2nd Circuit's holdings in Fay v. 1 Similar to the instant and underlying cases, this Court held exhaustion was not required, and prompt judicial review will be permitted, where claims involved questions of public or national importance. McCulloch v. Sociedad Nacional de Marineros de Honduras, 72 U.S. 10 (1963), at 17. 2 Similar to the instant and underlying cases, in a case involving a claim of an unfavorable personnel action, this Court analogously held that the plaintiff, who may have had to wait for years to be heard by the administrative agency, was not required to exhaust available