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
    • INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS—7th Cir.: Deputy warden, fired for posting offensive memes on Facebook, cannot revive claims
    • AGENCY NEWS—HHS, DOE investigating affirmative action practices of Duke Health and the Duke Law Journal
    • DISCRIMINATION—RACE—E.D. Ca.: City of Sacramento prevails against racial discrimination claim brought by firefighter
    • EEOC NEWS—Employers in New Mexico, Indiana, Michigan sued for male sexual harassment of female workers
    • EEOC NEWS—Lucas confirmed for second Commission term
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—DOL to No Longer Seek Pre-Litigation Liquidated Damages
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—Fifth Circuit Decision Clarifies Application of Highly Compensated Employee Overtime Exemption
    • FEDERAL LEGISLATION—Bill would move adjudicatory power over labor disputes to federal courts
    • LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Seattle sues Trump over executive orders, claims ‘overreach into areas of local control’
    • PENSION AND BENEFIT PLANS—6th Cir.: Union-trustees denied preliminary injunction to remove trustees who voted with employer-trustees
    • PENSION AND BENEFIT PLANS—7th Cir.: Employer gave clear notice of its desire to terminate CBA; successor agreement ended pension contributions
    • PUBLIC EMPLOYEES—9th Cir.: Due process, equal protection challenges to LA school district’s rescinded COVID-19 policy fail
    • TORT CLAIMS—D. Nev.: NFT company’s trade secrets misappropriation claims against former CEO proceed
    • VITAL BRIEFING—Cornered by own deadlines, Trump pumps out tariff deals, policies
    • WORTH NOTING—Cases of note involving COVID-19
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, FEDERAL LEGISLATION—Bill would move adjudicatory power over labor disputes to federal courts, (Aug 1, 2025)

    By Patricia K. Ruiz, J.D.

    The legislation would remove the NLRB’s ability to bring charges for unfair labor practices.

    The Protecting American Jobs Act, new legislation introduced by U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), would block the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) fro ...

    By Patricia K. Ruiz, J.D.

    The legislation would remove the NLRB’s ability to bring charges for unfair labor practices.

    The Protecting American Jobs Act, new legislation introduced by U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), would block the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) from prosecuting and adjudicating cases, returning adjudicatory power to federal courts, according to a press release from Senator Lee’s office. The legislation purports to remove “the influence of a politically charged federal agency” and would remove the alleged “thumb on the scale” in NLRB proceedings.

    Removal of political influence. Currently, the NLRB investigates and adjudicates union representation disputes, unfair labor practice complaints, and contract disputes. Federal court review is only allowed in limited circumstances. The press release states, “the NLRB acts as investigator, prosecutor, and judge with an unelected and unaccountable membership that turns over every few years—a structure poorly suited to ensure due process for either employees or employers.” As a result, it argues, complaint resolutions are delayed, the economy is damaged, and business decisions are stalled, ultimately stunting job growth. Under the system proposed in the legislation, victims of unfair labor practices can still bring complaints to the NLRB for investigation, but the power to hear and adjudicate complaint cases would remain with the federal court system.

    Change in NLRB authority. The legislation would: (1) remove the general counsel’s power to issue complaints related to unfair labor practices; (2) limit the NLRB’s rulemaking authority to rules concerning the internal functions of the Board; (3) remove the NLRB’s power to bring charges of unfair labor practices and to adjudicate those charges, instead providing the NLRB with the authority to investigate unfair labor practices; (4) move relief of unfair labor practices to the courts where an aggrieved party may bring a civil action; and (5) require the NLRB to review and revise its regulations to comply with these changes.

    News: FederalLegislation LaborNews Labor UnfairLaborPractices AgencyNews

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

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use