NEW YORK (AP) — For the billionaire Elon Musk and his cost-cutting team at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Karen Ortiz may be just one of the many faceless bureaucrats. But for some of her colleagues, she is giving a voice to those who feel they cannot speak.
Ortiz, of Puerto Rican descent, is an administrative judge at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency responsible for enforcing anti-discrimination laws in the workplace in the United States, which has experienced tumultuous changes since President Donald Trump took office. Like millions of other federal employees, Ortiz received an ominous email on January 28 titled “A fork in the road” giving them the option to resign from their positions as part of the government’s cost-cutting measures led by Trump and carried out by DOGE under the command of Musk, an unelected official.
Her alarm increased when her supervisor ordered the administrative judges in her New York district office to pause all current LGBTQ+ cases and send them to Washington for further review in order to comply with Trump’s executive order declaring that the government would only recognize two “immutable” sexes: male and female.
Ortiz denounced the lack of action by senior management in response to the directive, which she believed was contrary to the EEOC’s mission, and urged about 185 colleagues in an email to “resist” complying with “illegal mandates.” However, that email was “mysteriously” deleted, she said.
The next day, after another frustrating update of “A fork in the road”, Ortiz decided to take the initiative and sent an email directly to the acting president of the EEOC, Andrea Lucas, with a copy to over 1,000 colleagues, with the subject "A Spoon is Better than a Fork“. In the email, Ortiz questioned Lucas' suitability to serve as acting president, “let alone to have a license to practice law”.
Ortiz is just one person, but his email represents a larger reaction against the radical changes made by the Trump administration to federal agencies amidst an environment of confusion, anger, and chaos. It is also Ortiz’s way of taking a stand against the leadership of a civil rights agency that last month decided to dismiss seven of its own cases representing transgender workers, marking a significant shift from its previous interpretation of the law.
Immediately after sending her mass email, Ortiz said she received some supportive responses from colleagues, and one that called her unprofessional. However, within an hour, the message disappeared and she lost the ability to send more emails.
But it still made its way to the Internet. The email was recirculated on Bluesky and received over 10,000 “upvotes” on Reddit after someone posted it with the comment: “Wow, I wish I had that courage.”
“American hero,” a Reddit user described Ortiz, a sentiment that was supported by over 2,000 voters. “Who is this freedom fighter causing the fire?” wrote another.
“I know I am taking a great personal risk by sending this message, but at the end of the day, my actions align with what the EEOC is required to do by law,” Ortiz wrote. “I will not compromise my ethics or my duty to enforce the law. I will not cower in the face of harassment and intimidation.”
The EEOC did not feel the same way. The agency revoked his email privileges for about a week and sent him a written reprimand for “discourteous behavior.”
A spokesperson for the EEOC, contacted by The Associated Press, said: “We will refrain from commenting on internal communications and personnel matters. However, we want to point out that the agency has a long-standing policy prohibiting unauthorized emails to all employees, and all employees were recently reminded of that policy.”
A month later, Ortiz does not regret it.
“It was actually not something planned, it just came from the heart,” said the 53-year-old woman to The Associated Press in an interview, adding that partisan politics have nothing to do with her objections and that the public deserves protection from the EEOC, including transgender workers. “That’s how I feel and I won’t beat around the bush. And I will stand by what I wrote every day of the week, all day on Sunday.”
Ortiz said that he never intended for his email to go beyond the EEOC, and described it as a “love letter” to his colleagues. But he added, “I hope it ignites people’s passion.”
Ortiz said that he has received “a lot” of support privately in the month since he sent his email, including a thank you letter from a retired person in California telling him to “keep the faith.” However, open support from his colleagues at the EEOC beyond Reddit and Bluesky has been harder to come by.
“I think people are really scared,” he said.
William Resh, professor at the Sol Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California who studies how administrative structure and political environments affect public officials, commented on why federal workers may choose not to speak up even if they feel their mission is being undermined.
“We can talk about castles in the air, mission orientation, and all those other things. But at the end of the day, people have a salary to bring home, food to put on the table, and rent to pay," said Resh.
The most immediate danger, he said, is the threat to one’s livelihood, or provoking the anger of a manager.
“And that’s where you get this kind of silent response from federal employees, you don’t see many people speaking out in these positions because they don’t want to lose their jobs,” Resh said. “Who would?”
Richard LeClear, a U.S. Air Force veteran and EEOC staff member who is retiring early at 64 to avoid serving under the Trump administration, said that Ortiz’s email was “perfect,” but added that other colleagues who agreed with her may be afraid to speak up themselves.
“Retaliation is very real,” said LeClear.
Ortiz, who has been a federal employee for 14 years and at the EEOC for six, said she is not naive about the potential consequences. She has hired lawyers and maintains that her actions are protected as whistleblowing activity. As of Friday, she still had a job, but she is not a lifelong appointee and is aware that her healthcare, pension, and source of income could be at risk.
Ortiz, however, remains firm: "If they fire me, I will find another way to do this type of work and I will be fine. They will have to physically remove me from the office."
Many of Ortiz’s colleagues have children to support and protect, which puts them in a more difficult position than her to speak out, Ortiz acknowledged. She said that her legal education and American citizenship also put her in a position to be able to make changes.
Her parents, who arrived in the United States from Puerto Rico in the 1950s with limited English skills, instilled in her the value of standing up for others. Her firsthand experience with the Civil Rights Movement, and her own experience growing up in predominantly white spaces in Garden City, Long Island, prepared Ortiz to stand up for herself and others.
“It’s in my DNA,” she said. “I will use every bit of privilege I have to support myself in this.”
Ortiz received her undergraduate degree from Columbia University and her law degree from Fordham University. She knew she wanted to become a judge since her high school mock trial as a Supreme Court judge.
Civil rights have been a common thread in her career, and Ortiz said she was “super excited” when she got her job at the EEOC.
“This is how I wanted to end my career,” he said. “We’ll see if that happens.”