KCNF partner Elisabeth Baker-Pham appeared on Federal News Network’s Security Clearance Insecurity podcast to discuss the growing intersection between security clearance adjudications and employment law, and the misconceptions that often place federal employees at risk.
In the episode, “A New Era of Security Clearance Insecurity: New Legal Voices, Real-World Guidance for 2026,” Baker-Pham explained that many federal employees do not realize that the same underlying conduct can trigger two separate processes. An issue may be treated as an employment matter, such as a misconduct investigation, while simultaneously raising security clearance concerns governed by a different set of standards and timelines.
The episode provides practical guidance for federal employees, contractors, and others working in cleared environments who are navigating the overlapping demands of employment law and national security requirements.
The full episode is available to listen to below.
A New Era of Security Clearance Insecurity: New Legal Voices, Real-World Guidance for 2026
Baker-Pham noted that employees may believe a matter has been resolved once the employment process concludes, only to later receive a statement of reasons related to their clearance. “The considerations are different even though they overlap,” she explained, emphasizing that clearance adjudications are not resolved simply because a disciplinary issue has been addressed.
She also addressed common confusion surrounding foreign influence and foreign preference concerns. Baker-Pham explained that questions about family ties, citizenship, or foreign connections may feel discriminatory to employees who are new to the cleared environment. While those questions would be inappropriate in most employment contexts, she noted that there are nuances when national security is at issue and the criteria are evaluated differently in national security adjudications, where the government may be assessing, for example, the risk of coercion or inducement rather than personal background itself.
Throughout the conversation, Baker-Pham stressed the importance of honesty and preparation. She cautioned that attempting to minimize or conceal information often creates greater problems than the underlying issue. “Never lie,” she advised, explaining that almost any issue is easier to mitigate than a finding that an applicant was not truthful.
Baker-Pham also warned that marijuana use remains a serious risk for clearance holders, regardless of state law. She noted that federal law has not caught up with changing attitudes and that recent developments have created additional complications related to CBD products. “At the federal level, it is a mess,” she said, adding that continued use can still jeopardize clearance eligibility.
She encouraged clearance applicants and holders to familiarize themselves with the adjudicative guidelines and reporting requirements, including those governing self-reporting. Understanding what must be disclosed and how mitigating information can be presented, she explained, allows individuals to address issues early rather than reacting after a Statement of Reasons is issued.
Baker-Pham emphasized that timing matters. She noted that responding thoroughly to requests for additional information, providing documentation when asked, and seeking guidance before completing the SF-86 can significantly improve outcomes and reduce long-term costs. When done correctly, “helping the investigator is helping yourself,” she explained.
Reflecting on her work in the field, Baker-Pham underscored that security clearance cases often affect far more than a single job. For many federal employees and contractors, clearance eligibility determines access to an entire career, making these cases deeply personal and high stakes.