SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks alongside newly confirmed Attorney General Pam Bondi during her swearing in ceremony in the Oval Office at the White House on February 05, 2025 in Washington, D.C.
(Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
Fired NLRB Official Sues Trump Over 'Illegal and Unprecedented' Ouster
"The president's removal of Ms. Wilcox without even purporting to identify any neglect of duty or malfeasance, and without notice or a hearing, defies ninety years of Supreme Court precedent," according to the complaint.
Feb 05, 2025
Former Democratic National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox sued U.S. President Donald Trump in federal court Wednesday over her dismissal from the NLRB in late January.
Wilcox was first appointed to the body—which safeguards private sector workers' rights to organize—in 2021 by then-President Joe Biden and was re-confirmed for a five-year term by the Senate in 2023.
On January 28, Trump dismissed both Wilcox and NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, who, alongside Wilcox, helped strengthen workers' rights to form unions and went after employers it accused of undermining those rights. Given that Biden dismissed Trump's first-term NLRB general counsel on his first day in office, Abruzzo's firing was expected.
Wilcox's "unprecedented and illegal" firing—which was less expected than Abruzzo's—constitutes a "blatant violation" of the National Labor Relations Act, according to the complaint, which names both Trump and the acting chairman of the NLRB, Marvin Kaplan, as defendants. Wilcox is seeking an injunction against Kaplan, ordering him to reinstate her as a member of the board.
Under the National Labor Relations Act, the president can only remove board members in cases of "neglect of duty or malfeasance in office, but for no other cause" and only upon "notice and hearing," the filing states.
"The president's removal of Ms. Wilcox without even purporting to identify any neglect of duty or malfeasance, and without notice or a hearing, defies ninety years of Supreme Court precedent that has ensured the independence of critical government agencies like the Federal Reserve," Wilcox's attorney wrote.
The complaint points to a 1935 Supreme Court decision which restricted the president's power to remove members who perform perform quasi-legislative and judicial functions.
The complaint also notes that Wilcox's legal challenge is aimed at pushing back on a broader pattern of action by the Trump administration. Wilcox's dismissal is one of multiple "openly illegal firings" during Trump's first days back in the White House that appear "designed to test" Congress's ability to create independent agencies such as the NLRB, the complaint alleges.
"Although Ms. Wilcox has no desire to aid the president in establishing a test case, she is also cognizant of the fact that, if no challenge is made, the president will have effectively succeeded in rendering the NLRA's protections—and, by extension, that of other independent agencies—nugatory," wrote Wilcox's legal counsel.
The same day that Trump fired Wilcox and Abruzzo, he also dismissed two of the three Democrats on another independent federal body, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Wilcox's removal has also left the NLRB without a quorum, meaning it can't issue decisions on labor relations disputes.
Matt Bruenig, a labor lawyer who is also head of the People's Policy Project think tank, wrote in a blog post that the lawsuit sets up a constitutional challenge in which Trump will advocate for the removal of the section of the NLRA that offers removal protections to NLRB board members.
"The most likely outcome of all of this will be that the Supreme Court will rule that the removal protections in Section 3(a) of the NLRA are unconstitutional," Bruenig wrote.
"I don't think this ruling will matter all that much in the long run," he added, "but it will create delays and various headaches in the short run."
And so it begins...
Political revenge. Mass deportations. Project 2025. Unfathomable corruption. Attacks on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Pardons for insurrectionists. An all-out assault on democracy. Republicans in Congress are scrambling to give Trump broad new powers to strip the tax-exempt status of any nonprofit he doesn’t like by declaring it a “terrorist-supporting organization.” Trump has already begun filing lawsuits against news outlets that criticize him. At Common Dreams, we won’t back down, but we must get ready for whatever Trump and his thugs throw at us. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. By donating today, please help us fight the dangers of a second Trump presidency. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Former Democratic National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox sued U.S. President Donald Trump in federal court Wednesday over her dismissal from the NLRB in late January.
Wilcox was first appointed to the body—which safeguards private sector workers' rights to organize—in 2021 by then-President Joe Biden and was re-confirmed for a five-year term by the Senate in 2023.
On January 28, Trump dismissed both Wilcox and NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, who, alongside Wilcox, helped strengthen workers' rights to form unions and went after employers it accused of undermining those rights. Given that Biden dismissed Trump's first-term NLRB general counsel on his first day in office, Abruzzo's firing was expected.
Wilcox's "unprecedented and illegal" firing—which was less expected than Abruzzo's—constitutes a "blatant violation" of the National Labor Relations Act, according to the complaint, which names both Trump and the acting chairman of the NLRB, Marvin Kaplan, as defendants. Wilcox is seeking an injunction against Kaplan, ordering him to reinstate her as a member of the board.
Under the National Labor Relations Act, the president can only remove board members in cases of "neglect of duty or malfeasance in office, but for no other cause" and only upon "notice and hearing," the filing states.
"The president's removal of Ms. Wilcox without even purporting to identify any neglect of duty or malfeasance, and without notice or a hearing, defies ninety years of Supreme Court precedent that has ensured the independence of critical government agencies like the Federal Reserve," Wilcox's attorney wrote.
The complaint points to a 1935 Supreme Court decision which restricted the president's power to remove members who perform perform quasi-legislative and judicial functions.
The complaint also notes that Wilcox's legal challenge is aimed at pushing back on a broader pattern of action by the Trump administration. Wilcox's dismissal is one of multiple "openly illegal firings" during Trump's first days back in the White House that appear "designed to test" Congress's ability to create independent agencies such as the NLRB, the complaint alleges.
"Although Ms. Wilcox has no desire to aid the president in establishing a test case, she is also cognizant of the fact that, if no challenge is made, the president will have effectively succeeded in rendering the NLRA's protections—and, by extension, that of other independent agencies—nugatory," wrote Wilcox's legal counsel.
The same day that Trump fired Wilcox and Abruzzo, he also dismissed two of the three Democrats on another independent federal body, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Wilcox's removal has also left the NLRB without a quorum, meaning it can't issue decisions on labor relations disputes.
Matt Bruenig, a labor lawyer who is also head of the People's Policy Project think tank, wrote in a blog post that the lawsuit sets up a constitutional challenge in which Trump will advocate for the removal of the section of the NLRA that offers removal protections to NLRB board members.
"The most likely outcome of all of this will be that the Supreme Court will rule that the removal protections in Section 3(a) of the NLRA are unconstitutional," Bruenig wrote.
"I don't think this ruling will matter all that much in the long run," he added, "but it will create delays and various headaches in the short run."
Former Democratic National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox sued U.S. President Donald Trump in federal court Wednesday over her dismissal from the NLRB in late January.
Wilcox was first appointed to the body—which safeguards private sector workers' rights to organize—in 2021 by then-President Joe Biden and was re-confirmed for a five-year term by the Senate in 2023.
On January 28, Trump dismissed both Wilcox and NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, who, alongside Wilcox, helped strengthen workers' rights to form unions and went after employers it accused of undermining those rights. Given that Biden dismissed Trump's first-term NLRB general counsel on his first day in office, Abruzzo's firing was expected.
Wilcox's "unprecedented and illegal" firing—which was less expected than Abruzzo's—constitutes a "blatant violation" of the National Labor Relations Act, according to the complaint, which names both Trump and the acting chairman of the NLRB, Marvin Kaplan, as defendants. Wilcox is seeking an injunction against Kaplan, ordering him to reinstate her as a member of the board.
Under the National Labor Relations Act, the president can only remove board members in cases of "neglect of duty or malfeasance in office, but for no other cause" and only upon "notice and hearing," the filing states.
"The president's removal of Ms. Wilcox without even purporting to identify any neglect of duty or malfeasance, and without notice or a hearing, defies ninety years of Supreme Court precedent that has ensured the independence of critical government agencies like the Federal Reserve," Wilcox's attorney wrote.
The complaint points to a 1935 Supreme Court decision which restricted the president's power to remove members who perform perform quasi-legislative and judicial functions.
The complaint also notes that Wilcox's legal challenge is aimed at pushing back on a broader pattern of action by the Trump administration. Wilcox's dismissal is one of multiple "openly illegal firings" during Trump's first days back in the White House that appear "designed to test" Congress's ability to create independent agencies such as the NLRB, the complaint alleges.
"Although Ms. Wilcox has no desire to aid the president in establishing a test case, she is also cognizant of the fact that, if no challenge is made, the president will have effectively succeeded in rendering the NLRA's protections—and, by extension, that of other independent agencies—nugatory," wrote Wilcox's legal counsel.
The same day that Trump fired Wilcox and Abruzzo, he also dismissed two of the three Democrats on another independent federal body, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Wilcox's removal has also left the NLRB without a quorum, meaning it can't issue decisions on labor relations disputes.
Matt Bruenig, a labor lawyer who is also head of the People's Policy Project think tank, wrote in a blog post that the lawsuit sets up a constitutional challenge in which Trump will advocate for the removal of the section of the NLRA that offers removal protections to NLRB board members.
"The most likely outcome of all of this will be that the Supreme Court will rule that the removal protections in Section 3(a) of the NLRA are unconstitutional," Bruenig wrote.
"I don't think this ruling will matter all that much in the long run," he added, "but it will create delays and various headaches in the short run."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.