Which convictions are specifically treated as disqualifying in federal law enforcement adjudicative guidelines?
Executive summary
Federal adjudicative guidelines used across law‑enforcement and national‑security hiring treat certain criminal convictions as explicitly disqualifying—most prominently recent or serious felony convictions, convictions for terrorism‑related offenses, racketeering and related predicate crimes, and conduct covered by the Bond Amendment such as long felony sentences or dishonorable military discharges—while also allowing agencies to apply a “whole person” analysis and to consider patterns of misconduct, deferred adjudications, and other nuances on a case‑by‑case basis [1] [2] [3].
1. The statutory lists that act as hard disqualifiers: TSA’s catalog of disqualifying criminal offenses
TSA’s regulation enumerates a set of felonies that create permanent disqualifications if the applicant was convicted (or found not guilty by reason of insanity) in civilian or military courts; that list explicitly includes, among others, federal crimes of terrorism as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2332b(g), violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act where predicate acts match listed crimes, attempts and conspiracies to commit listed offenses, and other specified felonies—additionally the regulation treats want/warrant/indictment for those felonies as disqualifying until resolved and applies a seven‑year look‑back for certain convictions [4] [1].
2. The Bond Amendment and national‑security adjudication: felony convictions and military dishonorable discharges
National Security Adjudicative Guidelines (SEAD 4) and related commentary emphasize that, for access to particularly sensitive programs, the Bond Amendment bars persons convicted and incarcerated for more than one year and those discharged under dishonorable conditions from eligibility unless a specific waiver is granted; security‑clearance guidance therefore treats felony convictions and dishonorable military discharges as presumptive disqualifiers for SCI/SAP/Restricted Data access unless a meritorious waiver is available [2] [5].
3. Beyond enumerated felonies: patterns of behavior and the “whole person” standard
Adjudicative regulations for access to classified information make clear that a single adverse incident may not automatically disqualify an applicant, but a recent or recurring pattern of questionable judgment, irresponsibility, or emotional instability can be sufficient to deny or revoke eligibility—meaning convictions are weighed alongside other conduct, omissions on forms, drug use, or undisclosed arrests under a holistic standard [3] [6].
4. How conviction semantics and deferred outcomes complicate disqualification
Federal adjudicators and immigration authorities treat “conviction” broadly in many contexts—sometimes including findings where adjudication was withheld, deferred adjudication, or pleas that meet statutory definitions—so dismissal or sealing in state court does not always remove disqualification risk for federal suitability or security determinations; federal guidance and practitioner analysis warn that deferred adjudication can still carry collateral consequences for employment or clearance decisions [7] [8].
5. Agency‑level variations and local law‑enforcement standards
Municipal or agency hiring rules often add their own automatic disqualifiers beyond federal adjudicative lists—examples include local police departments barring applicants convicted of manslaughter, hit‑and‑run with injury, fleeing/eluding, certain DUI histories, civil‑rights violations, or bias crimes—underscoring that what is disqualifying for a TSA credential or a security clearance may differ from municipal hiring bans [9].
6. Practical takeaways and limits of available reporting
The clearest, specifically enumerated disqualifiers in federal rules appear in statutes/regulations like 49 C.F.R. 1572.103 (TSA) and in the Bond Amendment framework applied to special access programs—these identify terrorism offenses, RICO‑type predicate crimes, attempts/conspiracies, felony convictions with long sentences, and dishonorable military discharge as explicit bars—while 32 C.F.R. adjudicative guidelines reinforce that patterns of criminal conduct and related behavior can be disqualifying even when a single conviction is not dispositive; reporting reviewed here documents those categories but does not provide a single unified checklist that covers every federal agency’s hiring nuances, and some specifics (for example, exhaustive itemized offense lists) require consulting each agency’s implementing regulation [1] [2] [3] [6] [5].