A Texas federal district court has split with another Texas district court on a key question: when a court declares the National Labor Relations Board’s removal protections unconstitutional, can it sever the offending provisions and allow an unfair labor practice charge to proceed—or must the proceeding be permanently enjoined?

In

Updated 8/8/2026

As previously reported here and here, President Trump nominated James Macy to fill the third vacant Republican seat on the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or the “Board”). 

Today, August 7, 2026, the Senate voted 51-47 to confirm Macy as a new Republican member of the Board.

The Supreme Court’s June 29, 2026 decision in Trump v. Slaughter, No. 25-332 (2026), overruling Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935), has major implications for the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”). In a 6-3 decision, Chief Justice Roberts’s majority opinion held that for-cause removal protections

On June 23, 2026, the New York Court of Appeals issued a significant decision in Walton v. Comfort Systems USA (Syracuse), Inc., answering previously unsettled certified questions from the Second Circuit with important implications for employers performing work on public projects in New York. The Court held that under

On June 10, 2026, the AFL-CIO filed suit against the Department of Labor (“DOL”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (AFL-CIO v. Sonderling, No. 1:26-cv-02061 (D.D.C.)), challenging a final rule that imposes “sweeping changes” to the financial reporting obligations of labor organizations under the