{"id":214,"date":"2024-09-22T12:44:12","date_gmt":"2024-09-22T16:44:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kawsachunnews.com\/w\/trump-appointed-judge-shocks-by-backing-firms-claim-nlrb-unconstitutional\/"},"modified":"2024-09-22T12:44:12","modified_gmt":"2024-09-22T16:44:12","slug":"trump-appointed-judge-shocks-by-backing-firms-claim-nlrb-unconstitutional","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kawsachunnews.com\/w\/trump-appointed-judge-shocks-by-backing-firms-claim-nlrb-unconstitutional\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump-Appointed Judge Shocks by Backing Firm’s Claim: NLRB Unconstitutional!"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

On Tuesday, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) was blocked from proceeding with an unfair labor practices lawsuit against Findhelp, a tech company offering social services. This came after a judge appointed by former President Trump issued a temporary injunction in favor of the Texas-based company.<\/p>\n

U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman, from the Northern District of Texas, <\/strong><\/strong>ruled in support of Findhelp’s assertion that the administrative law judges at the NLRB are unconstitutional due to their immunity from dismissal by the White House. <\/p>\n

This line of defense has been adopted by other major corporations including SpaceX \u2013 Elon Musk’s aerospace enterprise, and a subsidiary of the Energy Transfer, the fossil fuel behemoth. Both of these corporations have successfully secured preliminary injunctions from Trump-appointed judges in Texas, insulating them from labor rights lawsuits. <\/p>\n

In the SpaceX lawsuit, the NLRB contended that “if an injunction were granted, it would prompt any employer or labor union dissatisfied with an investigation into their labor practices to request preliminary injunctions against NLRB proceedings.”<\/p>\n

Starbucks, Amazon, and Trader Joe’s have also aligned with the corporate agenda to undermine the NLRB’s capacity to execute its responsibilities as a federal agency charged with protecting workers from unfair labor practices. These companies argue that the agency’s structure, created nearly a century ago by the National Labor Relations Act under the New Deal, infringes on the president’s “removal powers” as stipulated by Article II of the U.S. Constitution.<\/p>\n

“Before the New Deal era, judges argued that things like overtime regulations and child labor laws were unconstitutional,” pointed out journalist Ryan Grim. <\/p>\n

\n
<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n

\u2014 (@)
\n <\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

During the Findhelp lawsuit, NLRB attorneys argued that the company is not eligible for relief from a court until the president attempts to remove the administrative law judge assigned to Findhelp’s case. However, Pittman stated he was “not convinced by the NLRB’s arguments.”<\/p>\n

Pittman referenced a precedent set by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which in 2022 declared that the protections preventing the dismissal of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s judges were unconstitutional. <\/p>\n

This month, two federal judges\u2014one appointed by ex-President Barack Obama and the other by current President Joe Biden\u2014have dismissed other corporate allegations claiming the NLRB is unconstitutionally structured. This sets the stage for a potential U.S. Supreme Court case to resolve the issue in the future. <\/p>\n

The latest ruling follows a complaint lodged with the NLRB 18 months ago by the Office and Professional Employees International Union. The union claimed Findhelp had wrongfully terminated and intimidated workers who were engaged in union organization efforts. The workers had voted 95-52 in favor of unionization. <\/p>\n

As a result of Pittman’s injunction, an NLRB administrative hearing to determine whether Findhelp illegally dismissed organizers and monitored employees will not proceed. <\/p>\n

“The NLRB safeguards Americans’ right to unionize, challenge unjust terminations, and collectively negotiate for better wages,” declared<\/a> the U.S. Congressional Progressive Caucus. “Without it, employers can disregard labor laws and strip workers of their rights. This is another instance of a Trump-appointed judge favoring wealthy corporations.”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n