
John Fry is a student at Harvard Law School.
The Fifth Circuit handed SpaceX a setback on Tuesday, allowing the company’s lawsuit against the National Labor Relations Board to be transferred from the Southern District of Texas to the Central District of California. SpaceX filed the lawsuit—which challenges the constitutionality of the NLRB on several grounds—in response to Unfair Labor Practice charges that the NLRB filed against it in California. The company contends that venue is proper in Texas because its alleged conduct affected employees located there, and because any order by the NLRB will regulate the company’s conduct there. However, the NLRB argues that all substantial events related to the case occurred in California, with only incidental effects reaching Texas. Where the case ends up could be crucial, as the Fifth Circuit (covering Texas) has issued a slew of recent opinions curtailing the power of federal agencies.
In February, a district court judge in Texas sided with the NLRB, granting the agency’s motion to transfer the suit to California. SpaceX promptly appealed to the Fifth Circuit, which paused the transfer temporarily. On Tuesday, a panel of three Fifth Circuit judges rejected SpaceX’s petition per curiam, giving no explanation for the decision. However, one judge did write a lengthy dissent, and the company has hinted that it may ask the entire Fifth Circuit to hear the venue dispute en banc.
As Gil reported, Starbucks is the latest major employer to raise constitutional arguments against the NLRB as a defense against ULP charges. In a brief submitted to the agency, the company rehashes other employers’ theories that the NLRB’s members and judges are impermissibly shielded from removal by the President. Like Amazon and Trader Joe’s, Starbucks has merely noted its objections during administrative proceedings, and has not filed a lawsuit in federal court to challenge the agency.
It is not yet clear whether Starbucks’ recent truce with Starbucks Workers United will alter the company’s attitude towards the NLRB. There have been other signs of de-escalation since the deal was announced: as Everest wrote, the Strategic Organizing Center (affiliated with SWU) has ended its proxy fight over the composition of Starbucks’ board of directors. Starbucks and other employers may also be treating the SpaceX lawsuit as a bellwether, waiting for a ruling on that case’s merits before deciding whether to file suits of their own.
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
June 24
In today’s news and commentary, the DOL proposes new wage and hour rules, Ford warns of EV battery manufacturing trouble, and California reaches an agreement to delay an in-person work mandate for state employees. The Trump Administration’s Department of Labor has advanced a series of proposals to update federal wage and hour rules. First, the […]
June 23
Supreme Court interprets ADA; Department of Labor effectively kills Biden-era regulation; NYC announces new wages for rideshare drivers.
June 22
California lawmakers challenge Garmon preemption in the absence of an NLRB quorum and Utah organizers successfully secure a ballot referendum to overturn HB 267.
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.