this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
16 points (100.0% liked)

Socialism

2819 readers
1 users here now

Beehaw's community for socialists, communists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian leftists (this means anti-capitalists) of all stripes. A place for all leftist and labor news and discussion, as long as you're nice about it.


Non-socialists are welcome to come to learn, though it's hard to get to in-depth discussions if the community is constantly fighting over the basics. We ask that non-socialists please be respectful and try not to turn this into a "left vs right" debate forum by asking leading questions or by trying to draw others into a fight.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Trump judge. Heavy Project 2025 vibes. archive

A federal judge in Texas on Tuesday cast new doubt on the National Labor Relations Board’s ability to oversee labor disputes, agreeing with Elon Musk’s SpaceX that the agency’s board members and administrative law judges are likely serving unconstitutionally.

SpaceX faces a range of labor complaints, including at least two complaints to the NLRB, amid a broader conservative push to limit the power of federal regulatory agencies. Along with SpaceX, other major companies including Amazon and Starbucks have filed legal challenges to the NLRB’s authority.


SpaceX noted that NLRB board members and administrative law judges — like many federal civil servants — are nonpolitical appointees and therefore can’t be fired at-will by the president. The company claims the board members therefore are “unconstitutionally insulated from the president’s oversight," making the board's action an unlawful attempt to "subject SpaceX to an administrative proceeding."

In an order on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Alan Albright agreed. Finding SpaceX was likely to succeed on its claims that NLRB officials were serving unconstitutionally, he issued an injunction blocking the NLRB hearing.

Albright, a Donald Trump appointee, acknowledged in his order that "there is a strong public interest in providing employees a mechanism to vindicate their NLRA rights." Nonetheless, he found that "Congress exceeds its power when it attempts to neuter the president’s constitutional power to remove and control executive officers."

A paywalled article: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/spacexs-constitutional-challenge-to-nlrb-gets-judicial-support

no comments (yet)
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here