Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • REMEDIES, DAMAGES—D.C. Cir.: Appeals court declines to disturb TRO protecting Special Counsel from removal
    • AGENCY NEWS—Mass firings at federal agencies over the weekend
    • ARBITRATION—D. Or.: Federal court denies arbitration but strikes class claims in Flowers Foods driver case
    • CLASS ACTIONS—S.D.N.Y.: Employee denied certification in suit alleging employer improperly relied on consumer reports
    • COVERAGE LIABILITY—D.N.D.: Claims against Subway for employee sexual abuse move forward
    • DISCRIMINATION—RELIGIOUS—E.D. Mich.: Jury to decide Title VII claims of former Red Cross nurse fired after refusing COVID-19 vaccine
    • EEOC NEWS—Agency moves to dismiss its own cases, brought on behalf of transgender and gender nonconforming workers
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—Breaking: NLRB drops opposition to SpaceX's constitutionality arguments
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—States take stand against Trump’s anti-DEI actions: what employers need to know
    • LABOR—UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES—W.D. Pa.: NLRB regional director denied motion for Section 10(j) injunction in bargaining dispute with newspaper
    • LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Trump administration seeks Supreme Court vacatur of D.C. Circuit restraining order in Dellinger lawsuit
    • NLRB NEWS—Acting General Counsel rescinds memos relating to student athletes, monitoring of employees, and noncompete agreements, among others
    • REMEDIES, DAMAGES—D.D.C.: Court refuses to enjoin OPM from operating its ‘government-wide email system’
    • REMEDIES, DAMAGES—D.D.C.: Organizations not entitled to TRO to stop DOGE employees’ access to agencies’ data
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, EXPERT INSIGHTS—Breaking: NLRB drops opposition to SpaceX's constitutionality arguments, (Feb 18, 2025)

    Law Firms Mentioned:Proskauer Rose
    Organizations Mentioned:Proskauer Rose, LLP | SpaceX

    By Michael Lebowich, Joshua Fox, and Michael S. Kratochvil of Proskauer Rose LLP

    On February 3, 2025, the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB" or the "Board") filed a letter with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Space Exploration Technologies Corp. v. NLRB, Consolidated Case No. 24-50627, et al., indicating th ...

    By Michael Lebowich, Joshua Fox, and Michael S. Kratochvil of Proskauer Rose LLP

    On February 3, 2025, the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB" or the "Board") filed a letter with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Space Exploration Technologies Corp. v. NLRB, Consolidated Case No. 24-50627, et al., indicating that it would not address constitutionality arguments raised in SpaceX's brief. As reported here, those arguments were as follows:

    • The NLRB's structure is unconstitutional in that it limits the removal of NLRB Administrative Law Judges ("ALJs") and Board Members, and permits Board Members to exercise executive, legislative, and judicial power in the same administrative proceeding; and

    • The Board's new expanded remedies violate employers' Seventh Amendment right to a trial-by-jury.

    The Board's position follows President Trump's firing of Board Member Gwynne A. Wilcox, which set up a constitutional battle over the President's removal power under Section 3(a) of the NLRA. As discussed here, that move left the Board without a quorum, which the Board indicated prevents it from "review[ing] ALJ recommended findings and orders" in the underlying unfair labor practice proceeding at issue in the SpaceX case.

    While neither constitutional argument raised by SpaceX is directly implicated by Member Wilcox's firing, the Board indicated in its letter that "[i]n light of these executive actions, Board counsel is not in a position to address the Board-member-removability arguments raised in the government's briefs." However, Board counsel will still argue that the injunctions—halting the merits of the SpaceX case until the constitutionality arguments are resolved—should be reversed. It remains to be seen whether interested parties will take up the defense against these constitutionality arguments in the Board's stead.

    View original.

    Breaking: NLRB Drops Opposition To SpaceX's Constitutionality Arguments

    The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

    Michael Lebowich, Joshua Fox and Michael S. Kratochvil

    Proskauer Rose LLP

    Eleven Times Square

    (Eighth Avenue & 41st Street)

    New York

    10036-8299

    United States

    Tel.: +1 212 9693000

    E-mail: gpolk@proskauer.com

    URL: www.proskauer.com/

    (c) Mondaq Ltd., 2025 - Tel. +44 (0)20 8544 8300 - http://www.mondaq.com

    Attorneys: (Proskauer Rose).

    ExpertInsights: Labor UnfairLaborPractices Procedure AgencyNews WhiteHouseNews PracticeTip

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use