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
Ativos relacionados
Últimas notícias
Isenção de Responsabilidade: As entidades do XM Group proporcionam serviço de apenas-execução e acesso à nossa plataforma online de negociação, permitindo a visualização e/ou uso do conteúdo disponível no website ou através deste, o que não se destina a alterar ou a expandir o supracitado. Tal acesso e uso estão sempre sujeitos a: (i) Termos e Condições; (ii) Avisos de Risco; e (iii) Termos de Responsabilidade. Este, é desta forma, fornecido como informação generalizada. Particularmente, por favor esteja ciente que os conteúdos da nossa plataforma online de negociação não constituem solicitação ou oferta para iniciar qualquer transação nos mercados financeiros. Negociar em qualquer mercado financeiro envolve um nível de risco significativo de perda do capital.
Todo o material publicado na nossa plataforma de negociação online tem apenas objetivos educacionais/informativos e não contém — e não deve ser considerado conter — conselhos e recomendações financeiras, de negociação ou fiscalidade de investimentos, registo de preços de negociação, oferta e solicitação de transação em qualquer instrumento financeiro ou promoção financeira não solicitada direcionadas a si.
Qual conteúdo obtido por uma terceira parte, assim como o conteúdo preparado pela XM, tais como, opiniões, pesquisa, análises, preços, outra informação ou links para websites de terceiras partes contidos neste website são prestados "no estado em que se encontram", como um comentário de mercado generalizado e não constitui conselho de investimento. Na medida em que qualquer conteúdo é construído como pesquisa de investimento, deve considerar e aceitar que este não tem como objetivo e nem foi preparado de acordo com os requisitos legais concebidos para promover a independência da pesquisa de investimento, desta forma, deve ser considerado material de marketing sob as leis e regulações relevantes. Por favor, certifique-se que leu e compreendeu a nossa Notificação sobre Pesquisa de Investimento não-independente e o Aviso de Risco, relativos à informação supracitada, os quais podem ser acedidos aqui.
