US judge rejects auto parts maker's challenge to NLRB structure
By Daniel Wiessner
Sept 9 (Reuters) -A federal judge in Detroit on Monday said an auto parts manufacturer is likely to lose its lawsuit challenging the structure of the National Labor Relations Board and refused to block the board's administrative case against the company from moving forward.
U.S. District Judge Laurie Michelson ruled that U.S. Supreme Court precedent from nearly a century ago foreclosed Yapp USA Automotive System's claims that the board's administrative law judges and its five members are improperly shielded from at-will removal by the president.
Michelson, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, also said the board's ability to order employers to compensate workers subjected to illegal labor practices does not violate the right to a jury trial granted by the Seventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Michelson denied Yapp's motion to block a board case from moving forward in which the company is accused of firing a union supporter and engaging in other unlawful conduct in the time leading up to a 2023 union election at its factory in Romulus, Michigan.
An NLRB spokeswoman declined to comment.
A lawyer for Tennessee-based Yapp did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Shortly after Michelson issued her ruling, the company filed a notice of appeal and asked the judge to stay the board's administrative case pending the outcome of the appeal.
At least 20 other companies, including Elon Musk's rocket maker SpaceX, Starbucks, Amazon, Trader Joe's and Macy's, are challenging the NLRB's structure or its enforcement powers in pending lawsuits and administrative cases.
Michelson's ruling creates a split with two judges in Texas who in July said there was merit to similar claims against the NLRB brought by SpaceX and pipeline operator Energy Transfer.
Those judges, who are both appointees of Republican former President Donald Trump, said they were bound by a 2022 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in Jarkesy v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that said SEC administrative judges were unconstitutionally insulated from removal. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the Jarkesy ruling on other grounds in June and did not reach the issue of restrictions on removal.
But the Ohio-based 6th Circuit, which covers Michigan, in a separate 2022 case upheld removal protections for administrative judges with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Michelson on Monday said that the ruling made clear that administrative judges can be shielded from at-will removal if they only make non-final recommendations to agencies rather than issuing final, binding decisions.
"NLRB ALJs fit comfortably within that description," she wrote.
Michelson also cited a 1935 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Humphrey's Executor v. United States that said removal restrictions for members of the Federal Trade Commission were constitutional. The Supreme Court is currently considering a petition asking it to overrule Humphrey's Executor in a case involving the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.
The case is Yapp USA Automotive Systems v. NLRB, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, No. 2:24-cv-12173.
For Yapp: R. Michael Azzi of Warner Norcross & Judd
For the NLRB: Michael Dale
Read more:
Amazon challenges US labor board's structure in lawsuit over union election
NLRB, Macy's duel over US Supreme Court ruling's impact on agency powers
US judge unlikely to block NLRB case pending challenge to agency's powers
SpaceX wins block on US labor board case over severance agreements
US judge blocks NLRB case against energy firm challenging agency's structure
NLRB's Abruzzo hits back at 'low-road' companies challenging agency's structure
SEC in-house judges violate right to jury trial, appeals court rules
Actifs liés
Dernières actualités
Avertissement : Les entités de XM Group proposent à notre plateforme de trading en ligne un service d'exécution uniquement, autorisant une personne à consulter et/ou à utiliser le contenu disponible sur ou via le site internet, qui n'a pas pour but de modifier ou d'élargir cette situation. De tels accès et utilisation sont toujours soumis aux : (i) Conditions générales ; (ii) Avertissements sur les risques et (iii) Avertissement complet. Un tel contenu n'est par conséquent fourni que pour information générale. En particulier, sachez que les contenus de notre plateforme de trading en ligne ne sont ni une sollicitation ni une offre de participation à toute transaction sur les marchés financiers. Le trading sur les marchés financiers implique un niveau significatif de risques pour votre capital.
Tout le matériel publié dans notre Centre de trading en ligne est destiné à des fins de formation / d'information uniquement et ne contient pas – et ne doit pas être considéré comme contenant – des conseils et recommandations en matière de finance, de fiscalité des investissements ou de trading, ou un enregistrement de nos prix de trading ou une offre, une sollicitation, une transaction à propos de tout instrument financier ou bien des promotions financières non sollicitées à votre égard.
Tout contenu tiers, de même que le contenu préparé par XM, tels que les opinions, actualités, études, analyses, prix, autres informations ou liens vers des sites tiers contenus sur ce site internet sont fournis "tels quels", comme commentaires généraux sur le marché et ne constituent pas des conseils en investissement. Dans la mesure où tout contenu est considéré comme de la recherche en investissement, vous devez noter et accepter que le contenu n'a pas été conçu ni préparé conformément aux exigences légales visant à promouvoir l'indépendance de la recherche en investissement et, en tant que tel, il serait considéré comme une communication marketing selon les lois et réglementations applicables. Veuillez vous assurer que vous avez lu et compris notre Avis sur la recherche en investissement non indépendante et notre avertissement sur les risques concernant les informations susdites, qui peuvent consultés ici.
