
In a Year of Working Dangerously, Fear of Trump Marks Public Service Awards
Every year in Washington, hundreds of federal workers put on gowns and tuxedos to honor colleagues who battle disease, pursue criminals and invent new technology, in what is billed as the Oscars of public service. Tearful honorees call co-workers and families onstage, and cabinet secretaries and the president offer thanks in person or by video.
Things looked different this year.
These are difficult times to be a nonpartisan federal expert, as the Trump administration has cast civil servants as villains and forced out a quarter-million of them. For the first time in the two-decade history of the Samuel J. Heyman Service to America Medals, the federal employee of the year — the biggest honor — was no longer a federal employee.
David Lebryk, a former top Treasury Department official, was forced out of his career position for refusing to grant Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency what he considered unlawful access to the government's payment system.
In accepting his award, Mr. Lebryk noted that 'most of my career was spent trying to be unnoticed.' But he referred to the circumstances that led to his resignation, and offered a credo for public service.
'It is important to exercise principled leadership, make difficult decisions, have the courage and conviction to stand behind those decisions and be accountable and ultimately prepared to accept the consequences of those decisions,' he said.
There were no other acceptance speeches for awards given at the event — a departure from previous years — because some honorees said they were fearful of even inadvertently irking the administration. At least one winner turned down the award because the worker's boss, a Trump appointee, forbade the worker to accept it.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
7 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Israel-Iran Conflict Continues, Trump Weighs Options
00:00 What are Donald Trump's options at this point? Well, Tom, ever since President Trump left that G7 summit early to focus on the geopolitical situation in the Middle East, that has been the number one question. What are his options here? What is he thinking? Can we get insight into what is going on in President Trump's mind? We know that we had this reportedly one hour meeting with his national security team in Washington. There was no statement put out afterwards. So unclear what was discussed in that meeting. He also had a call with the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. No readout of that call either. But at this point, there is a lot of focus on some of the posts that he put out on social yesterday, and not only because of the content of what he's saying, calling for Iran's unconditional surrender, suggesting that the US know exactly where the ayatollah is. But for now, he's safe. However, at least think that in with the threats if Iran don't yield to the US terms, but also using the plural term, we are suggesting that the US are somehow already involved or even tacitly participating in the Israel campaign against Iran right now. So his options at this point are do they get actively militarily engaged as well? Do they start really deploying U.S. assets and aiding actively Israel with these airstrikes and attacks on Iran? Or do they push for the diplomatic channel and try to bring even out weakened Iranian regime with weakens military and defense capabilities in addition to nuclear capabilities to the table and try to get them to agree to terms. As previously discussed, the six rounds of U.S. Iran talks were supposed to take place on Sunday. They were canceled. In the meantime, the hostilities between Iran and Israel continue. More attacks overnight at the death toll in Iran hasn't been formally updated, but some human rights groups are saying that the death toll has climbed to more than 500, of which about 100 constitute security personnel. Some of those senior commanders in Israel, the death toll official figure is still sitting at 24. Of note, though, Tom, as well, the US embassy in Jerusalem is now closed for three days. Okay. So the conflict, of course, continues. And President Trump, as you say, weighing up what could be a monumental, potentially historic decision. What have other world leaders being saying about this conflict, about this war now, Joumanna? Yeah, well, you have to remember, President Trump on both his first term and his second term, talked about ending the, quote unquote, forever wars in the Middle East. He spoke about that when he was in Saudi Arabia just a couple of weeks ago. But it's interesting to hear that some other leaders around the world are a bit more cautious, namely because they are beginning to draw parallels between the decision to attack Iraq back in 2003 and the chaos that unfolded in Libya after military intervention there. Take a listen to what President Macron said on the sidelines of the G7 summit last night. No to military actions aimed at regime change because no one knows what comes next. Haven't we collectively seen the consequences this has had in the region and beyond? Does anyone think what was done in Iraq in 2003 was a good idea? Does anyone think that what was done in Libya last decade was a good idea? No. So the international community agreeing that Iran shouldn't develop the capability of an atomic weapon or nuclear weapon, but at the same time saying that going one step further and trying to push or externally force regime change doesn't have good results. If you take other episodes in history where that has happened in the Middle East, including in this example, President Macron talk specifically about Iraq and Libya, which is why many of the countries in the region, Arab states, the likes of Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia, all of them are pushing for mediation. They're pushing to restart those diplomatic channels, condemning the acts that Israel and the actions that Israel have taken only six days ago, and saying that at this point that what they did, the military aggression, actually violates the principles of the charter of the United Nations. So there is a bigger consensus of countries out there pushing for a diplomatic solution, looking to bring down the temperature and others going as far as President Macron suggesting that if you push too hard and regime change, it could have ultimately undesired consequences and potentially even lead to chaos.


The Verge
17 minutes ago
- The Verge
Posted Jun 17, 2025 at 6:54 PM EDT 4 Comments / 4 New
The Trump administration is apparently trying to shut down the board that investigates chemical explosions in the US. What could go wrong? [Link: Trump quietly shutters the only federal agency that investigates industrial chemical explosions | |


The Verge
17 minutes ago
- The Verge
Posted Jun 17, 2025 at 6:54 PM EDT 0 Comments / 4 New
Cool, cool. The Trump administration is apparently trying to shut down the board that investigates chemical explosions in the US. What could go wrong? Trump quietly shutters the only federal agency that investigates industrial chemical explosions [