As is often the case, in the most recent term of the Supreme Court, there was one case that grabbed all the headlines and dominated the news. You may have heard of it. While undoubtedly important, unless you have grand ideas of running for President of the United States, Trump v. United States probably isn’t affecting your day to day life.
However, as of July 1, the Court had issued 59 other “less sexy” opinions. Some of these will have long-lasting impacts in the workplace. A quick scan of the docket wouldn’t lead you to this conclusion. No cases dealt with labor and employment law per se. However, the Court’s decisions in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency, Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and, most notably, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, all curtailed federal agency power. In Loper Bright, the Court held that judges are to exercise their own judgment in analysis of laws. Administrative agencies’ interpretations of the law – while perhaps still persuasive – can no longer be treated as binding. The other decisions narrowed the range of penalties agencies can impose if not statutorily prescribed (Jarkesy) and required agencies to be more transparent and accountable in the rulemaking process (Ohio v. EPA and Corner Post).
The four federal agencies having the biggest impact on the workplace are the Department of Labor (DOL), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA), and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). All of these agencies will feel the strain from this recent string of SCOTUS opinions, and the impacts will undoubtedly be felt at the ground level in the workforce.
Consider that, since 2023 alone, these four administrative agencies have published rules on independent contractor misclassification, overtime, harassment, and pregnancy, among other subjects. Every one of those has a pending challenge in court. In the past, these rules could have survived legal challenges because of Chevron deference, i.e., courts’ deference to the agencies’ reasonable interpretations of the law. Agencies will no longer be able to use this doctrine in their defense.
This will have a natural impact on agency rulemaking going forward as well. Beyond the facial changes to the rulemaking processes in Ohio v. EPA and Corner Post, it is natural to expect that agencies will be less likely to promulgate more progressive-leaning rules, anticipating more frequent (and laborious) judicial challenges. Just last month, I championed the EEOC’s new rules on workplace harassment and their protection of the LGBTQ+ community. It is fair to wonder whether that rule would look the same if published just one month later.
As the impacts of these recent Supreme Court decisions are felt over time, RKW Law Group will be your one-stop shop for ensuring your workplace is up to speed on the latest developments and laws.
