Inset left: President Donald Trump speaks at a hearing of the Religious Liberty Commission at the Museum of the Bible, Monday, Sept. 8, 2025, in Washington (AP Photo/Alex Brandon). Inset right: Kash Patel (FBI). Background: The FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. (Google Maps).
A trainee for an FBI special agent position who alleges he was "singled out" and fired in October for displaying a pride flag on his work desk in a Los Angeles office is asking a federal judge to send his lawsuit against Director Kash Patel to discovery at the court's "earliest convenience."
David Maltinsky, who is gay, first filed the lawsuit in November, claiming that Patel ended his 16-year career as a staff operations specialist and intelligence support employee with the FBI — dashing his "childhood dream" of becoming a special agent. The plaintiff alleged that he was fired because he "displayed a Progress Pride flag at his workstation — which the FBI itself had flown and which he displayed with the permission and approval of his superiors."
As Patel attempts to defend his reputation in defamation lawsuits he's filed, the FBI director simultaneously faces multiple complaints alleging he "weaponiz[ed] government for political reasons" and carried out wrongful terminations.
Patel allegedly led the charge on Donald Trump's retribution campaign against agents who criminally investigated the president or who were otherwise deemed to have engaged in "unprofessional conduct and a lack of impartiality in carrying out duties[.]"
In the present case, the reason offered for Maltinsky's firing from his "probationary employment" with three weeks of training left was his "poor judgment with an inappropriate display of political signage in your work area during your previous assignment at the Los Angeles Field Office."
The plaintiff is now opposing Patel's partial motion to dismiss and digging deeper to "plumb the facts regarding Defendants' egregious actions."
"Defendants' shocking abuse of an honorable member of the federal law enforcement community cries out for justice," one Wednesday filing said, teasing a separate motion regarding discovery. "Defendants do not contest that Maltinsky adequately pleaded First Amendment and Appointments Clause claims—meaning this case must proceed to discovery."
On the discovery front, the plaintiff is asking Senior U.S. District Judge Richard Leon to swiftly put the Trump administration on the spot again. Maltinsky's lawyers with the Washington Litigation Group called the case a "textbook example in which waiting makes little practical sense."
"[O]ne way or another, to resolve the First Amendment claims at minimum, this case must head to discovery. Because there is no need to wait for discovery to begin, Maltinsky respectfully requests the Court schedule a Rule 16 conference at its earliest convenience," the motion said. "Defendants have indicated they oppose this motion."
Follow Law&Crime:
Comments