A federal appeals court on Thursday declined to enforce a temporary decision blocking the Trump administration from restricting collective bargaining rights for a significant portion of the federal workforce, though the legal battle continues. The ruling concerns a challenge brought by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) against a pair of executive orders issued in 2025.
Appeals Court Ruling
A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that it could not uphold a preliminary injunction that would have prevented the implementation of the executive orders. These orders cite a provision of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act to limit collective bargaining at most federal agencies, citing national security concerns. The injunction had been paused by the court since last August.
AFGE argued that the invocation of national security was a pretext for retaliation against the union for challenging Trump administration policies in court. However, the panel found that the administration likely would have taken the same action even without the union’s legal challenges.
U.S. Circuit Judge Daniel Bress, a Trump appointee, wrote that guidance from the Office of Personnel Management supported the conclusion that the executive orders have “a legitimate grounding in national security concerns.”
Concurring Opinion and Next Steps
U.S. Circuit Judge John Owens, an Obama appointee, concurred with the ruling but noted that the panel’s decision was limited by the information presented. He stated that a more complete factual record could lead to a different conclusion regarding potential retaliation. Specifically, the court did not consider a legal test established in the 1977 Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle case.
AFGE National President Everett Kelley stated that the union will continue its legal challenge at the district court level and is considering seeking a review of the case by the entire Ninth Circuit bench. Kelley emphasized that the Ninth Circuit affirmed that federal district courts have jurisdiction to hear the challenge, calling it a “precedent-setting victory.”
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decide?
The court declined to enforce a temporary decision blocking the Trump administration from restricting collective bargaining rights for a significant portion of the federal workforce.
What is AFGE’s argument against the executive orders?
AFGE argues that the invocation of national security concerns is a pretext to retaliate against the union for challenging the administration’s policies in court.
What are the possible next steps in this case?
AFGE plans to continue pursuing its claims at the district court level and is considering seeking a review by the entire Ninth Circuit bench.
As the legal process continues, will the outcome of this case significantly alter the landscape of federal employee union representation?
