In today’s news and commentary, California compromises with unions to achieve housing reforms; the Eleventh Circuit rejects a challenge from a transgender teacher; and Harvard removes hundreds of students from its graduate student union.

On Monday, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed two bills that significantly limited the scope of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The bills carve out some “infill” housing development from CEQA requirements, allowing denser housing construction without the environmental challenges that have been a central culprit in exacerbating California’s housing crisis. Some unions initially opposed the bills, arguing that they would make it easier for developers to use non-union labor at substandard wages. However, most unions dropped their opposition after amendments that preserved prevailing wage requirements for projects above certain size or affordability thresholds. In the context of debates over the relationship between unions and the growing “abundance” movement, this compromise could illustrate how reformers can pursue affordability without sacrificing worker interests.

On Wednesday, the Eleventh Circuit rejected a transgender teacher’s challenge to a Florida law that prohibits public school employees from using gender-affirming titles and pronouns at school. The plaintiff, a transgender woman, used the title “Ms.” on her whiteboard and syllabi and wore a pin in class displaying “she/her” pronouns. The district court found that the law likely violated her First Amendment rights because the speech reflected her gender identity as a private citizen, not her duties as a government employee. The Eleventh Circuit reversed, holding that her speech within the classroom was likely “pursuant to [her] official duties,” even if it reflects a gender identity she holds outside of the workplace. The decision allows the suit to proceed, so Wood may ultimately prevail, but it marks another setback for transgender workers in a legal environment increasingly hostile to their rights.

Finally, today Harvard University removed 800 students from its graduate student union, claiming they do not meet the NLRA’s definition of “employee.” The removed students are paid only via stipends, and a Harvard spokesperson cited the NLRB’s decision in MIT to claim that stipend recipients “do not perform services for the university in exchange for compensation.” The move shrinks the size of the bargaining unit by 15% — while the union could challenge the decision, the NLRB still lacks a quorum, and any new appointments by the Trump administration will likely tilt the Board even further against broad recognition for student workers.