Corporate Counsel Daily, Federal labor unions win injunction against Trump’s efforts to stop collective bargaining, (Jun 25, 2025)

By Cathleen Calhoun, J.D.

“President Trump applied the national security label to an unprecedented swath of federal agencies, including whole cabinet departments for the first time in history.”

Six labor unions representing federal employees were granted a preliminary injunction from a federal district court in California to pause President Trump’s Executive Order that ends the requirement of federal agencies to collectively bargain with them, since the court found irreparable harm would occur without it. The unions were able to demonstrate a serious question under the First Amendment—possible retaliation for protected speech—that warranted preserving the status quo pending further litigation (American Federation of Government Employees,AFL-CIO v. Trump, No. 25-cv-03070-JD (N.D. Cal. Jun. 24, 2025)).

The labor unions that brought the motion are the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (AFGE); American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO (AFSCME); National Nurses Organizing Committee/National Nurses United (NNOC/NNU); Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO (SEIU); National Association of Government Employees, Inc. (NAGE); and National Federation of Federal Employees, IAM, AFL-CIO (NFFE).

Executive Order. On March 27, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order (EO) 14251, Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs, an order excluding an unprecedented number of federal employees from the coverage of the Federal Service-Labor Management Relations Statute (FSLMRS), enacted by Congress decades ago. Under that statute, Americans who work for the federal government as civil servants have the right to unionize and collectively bargain for the conditions of their employment. According to the Trump Administration, the exclusion of certain federal employees from the FSLMRS under the executive order is allowed under Section 7103(b)(1) of the FSLMRS. That section allows a President to exclude an agency or subdivision from the FSLMRS upon a determination that: “(A) the agency or subdivision has as a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work, and (B) the provisions of this chapter cannot be applied to that agency or subdivision in a manner consistent with national security requirements and considerations.” In tandem with EO 14251, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued guidance stating that the cabinet departments, agencies, and subdivisions listed in EO 14251 “are no longer required to collectively bargain with Federal unions” and that the unions would no longer be treated as “exclusive[ly] recogni[zed] labor organizations for employees.”

The court noted, “It is undisputed that President Trump is the first president since the enactment of the FSLMRS to order the exclusion of cabinet-level departments in their entirety…”

Allegations. The complaint by the unions alleges claims against the government for: (1) retaliation and viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; (2) ultra vires action by the President in violation of Chapter 71 of Title 5 of the U.S. Code; (3) deprivations of procedural due process in violation of the Fifth Amendment; (4) abrogation of property rights in a federal contract in violation of the Fifth Amendment; and (5) arbitrary and irrational classification in violation of the Equal Protection component of the Fifth Amendment.

Analysis. On the First Amendment violation allegation, the court found that the unions were highly likely to be able to establish that they engaged in constitutionally protected activity. “The record establishes that plaintiffs have frequently spoken against actions undertaken by President Trump and his administration since January 2025,” the court wrote. The unions also brought forward evidence that, according to the court, showed the agency exclusions in EO 14251 could be retaliation for protected speech. On that point, the court said, “President Trump applied the national security label to an unprecedented swath of federal agencies, including whole cabinet departments for the first time in history.” Since the unions demonstrated a serious question under the First Amendment that warranted preserving the status quo pending further litigation, the court did not take up the unions’ other claims as also potential grounds for an injunction.

Preliminary injunction. Irreparable harm was found for the issuance of a preliminary injunction. According to the court, the loss of collective bargaining rights is deemed to be irreparable because “the value of the right to enjoy the benefits of union representation is immeasurable in dollar terms once it is delayed or lost.” However, since the unions did not address the foreign service exclusions that were made under Section 3 of the EO, the court enjoined only the implementation of Section 2 of EO 14251.

The case is No. 25-cv-03070-JD.

Attorneys: Ramya Ravindran (Bredhoff & Kaiser) for American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO. Tyler J. Becker, U.S. Department of Justice, for Donald J. Trump.

Companies: American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO

MainStory: TopStory Labor UnionsMembers Bargaining PublicEmployees RemediesDamages Retaliation CaliforniaNews GCNNews