
Holden Hopkins is a student at Harvard Law School.
In today’s News & Commentary, New York looks to continue the antitrust fight and Trump’s anti-DEI orders are likely to prompt lawsuits.
New York lawmakers are pushing to overhaul the state’s century-old antitrust laws with a bill that would empower authorities and private actors to sue businesses abusing their market dominance. The legislation, introduced by State Senate Deputy Majority Leader Michael Gianaris, reflects former FTC Chair Lina Khan’s efforts to curb corporate monopolies and expand protections for workers and small businesses. The bill introduces an “abuse of dominance” standard, inspired by European models, allowing broader antitrust claims. It also proposes a comprehensive merger notification program to scrutinize labor market impacts, echoing federal initiatives.
Despite Senate approval last year, the bill faces resistance in the Assembly, where some lawmakers and business groups claim it may drive companies out of New York and raise consumer costs. Meanwhile, labor groups like ALIGN and unions such as the Teamsters strongly support the measure, citing its potential to counteract corporate exploitation.
President Trump has reignited his campaign against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives with new executive orders targeting both federal agencies and private companies. Building on his 2020 order that restricted DEI training topics, his second-term directives seek to eliminate DEI programs in federal agencies and require private companies with federal contracts to certify their employment practices do not rely on race or sex-based preferences deemed biased. Legal experts and advocacy groups predict significant legal challenges, citing similarities to previous orders which courts partially blocked on First Amendment and due process grounds. However, other experts caution that the updated orders may be less vulnerable to free speech challenges, as they focus more on hiring practices than on training content.
Civil rights groups argue the measures are too broad, attacking lawful practices aimed at expanding workforce diversity. Meanwhile, legal precedents, such as rulings against Florida’s 2022 “Stop WOKE” law, provide a roadmap for opposing these policies. Courts have struck down similar measures on free speech grounds, but Trump’s authority over federal agencies may afford him more latitude. Still, pushback is expected, not only from litigation but also from organized labor groups determined to defend collective bargaining agreements and workplace protections.
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
June 20
Three state bills challenge Garmon preemption; Wisconsin passes a bill establishing portable benefits for gig workers; and a sharp increase in workplace ICE raids contribute to a nationwide labor shortage.
June 19
Report finds retaliatory action by UAW President; Senators question Trump's EEOC pick; California considers new bill to address federal labor law failures.
June 18
Companies dispute NLRB regional directors' authority to make rulings while the Board lacks a quorum; the Department of Justice loses 4,500 employees to the Trump Administration's buyout offers; and a judge dismisses Columbia faculty's lawsuit over the institution's funding cuts.
June 17
NLRB finds a reporter's online criticism of the Washington Post was not protected activity under federal labor law; top union leaders leave the Democratic National Committee amid internal strife; Uber reaches a labor peace agreement with Chicago drivers.
June 16
California considers bill requiring human operators inside autonomous delivery vehicles; Eighth Circuit considers challenge to Minnesota misclassification law and whether "having a family to support" is a gendered comment.
June 15
ICE holds back on some work site raids as unions mobilize; a Maryland judge approves a $400M settlement for poultry processing workers in an antitrust case; and an OMB directive pushes federal agencies to use union PLAs.