Will Trump’s Attorney General Override the NLRB?

By
Matt Bruenig

An anti-union trade association is urging the US attorney general to invalidate 15 previously decided NLRB cases. The group argues the AG can and should declare that certain board precedent is no longer binding, an unprecedented and illegal move.

The National Labor Relations Board seal is displayed on decisions and orders volumes at the headquarters in Washington, DC, on Monday, September 30, 2019. (Andrew Harrer / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

On April 3, 2025, the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW), an anti-union trade association, sent Attorney General Pam Bondi a letter urging her to invalidate fifteen National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) cases that were decided during the Biden administration.

It is common for the NLRB to reverse some of its precedent whenever control of the presidency changes from one party to the other. The way this has always worked is that the general counsel brings a case through the NLRB adjudicative process and then the board uses the case to announce that they are establishing a new rule on a particular point of law.

The letter from CDW seizes upon Executive Order No. 14215 and President Donald Trump’s full embrace of the conservative unitary executive theory to argue that AG Bondi can and should just declare that certain NLRB precedent is no longer binding.

This sort of thing has never happened before. The NLRB is an independent agency, and the attorney general has no statutory role in how it operates. Such a move by the AG would be illegal under prevailing understandings of administrative law, but of course Trump and the conservative legal movement are seeking to have the Supreme Court invalidate a large swath of administrative law on the theory that it unconstitutionally restricts the power of the president.

The Economic Policy Institute has a piece about the letter, written by former NLRB member Lauren McFerran and AFL-CIO general counsel Lynn Rhinehart, explaining how unusual such a move would be. The CDW letter and a summary of it can be found here.

This letter from the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (dated April 3, 2025) urges Attorney General Pam Bondi to direct the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to no longer treat certain Biden-era board decisions as binding precedent. The letter argues that under Executive Order No. 14215, the attorney general has authority to reject these decisions and require the NLRB to align with her interpretations of the law. The coalition contends that the NLRB has no legal obligation to treat any adjudication decision as binding precedent and can simply announce it will no longer follow certain legal interpretations. The letter claims these Biden-era decisions are unconstitutional, inconsistent with governing statutes, and/or poorly reasoned.

Cases the Coalition Urges Bondi to Invalidate

  1. Amazon.com Services, LLC, 373 NLRB No. 136 (2024): The board overruled Babcock & Wilcox and held that employers violate Section 8(a)(1) when they compel employees to attend anti-union captive-audience meetings under threat of discipline or discharge.
  2. Siren Retail Corp. d/b/a Starbucks, 373 NLRB No. 135 (2024): The board overruled Tri-Cast, Inc. and held that employer campaign statements about the loss of individualized grievance rights due to unionization must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis under Gissel, rejecting the prior categorical rule permitting such statements.
  3. Home Depot USA, Inc., 373 NLRB No. 25 (2024): The board held that an employer violated Section 8(a)(1) by prohibiting an employee from wearing “BLM” on their required work apron, finding such expression part of protected concerted activity related to opposing racial discrimination in the workplace.
  4. Thryv, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 22 (2022): The board ruled employers are liable for direct and foreseeable financial harms flowing from unfair labor practices.
  5. Lion Elastomers, 372 NLRB No. 83 (2023): The board overruled General Motors and reinstated setting-specific standards like Atlantic Steel to determine whether employee misconduct during protected activity loses the National Labor Relations Act’s protection, rejecting the uniform Wright Line standard for such cases.
  6. Miller Plastic Products, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 134 (2023): The board overruled Alstate Maintenance and clarified that individual employee complaints can constitute concerted activity under Meyers II when they are made in a context suggesting group concern, reaffirming a broader interpretation of Section 7 protection.
  7. McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (2023): The board overruled Baylor University Medical Center and IGT, holding that offering severance agreements with broad confidentiality and nondisparagement clauses unlawfully interferes with employees’ Section 7 rights.
  8. Endurance Environmental Solutions, LLC, 373 NLRB No. 141 (2024): The board overruled MV Transportation and reinstated the “clear and unmistakable waiver” standard, requiring explicit contractual language before finding that a union waived its right to bargain over mandatory subjects.
  9. Metro Health Inc. d/b/a Hospital Metropolitano Rio Piedras, 373 NLRB No. 89 (2024): The board overruled UPMC and eliminated the practice of approving “consent orders” over the objection of the general counsel and charging party, holding that such orders are inconsistent with the board’s rules and statutory framework.
  10. American Federation for Children, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 137 (2023): The board overruled Amnesty International and held that advocacy by employees on behalf of coworkers — including those with uncertain immigration status — constitutes protected concerted activity for mutual aid or protection, even if the person aided is not currently a statutory employee.
  11. Cemex Construction Materials Pacific, LLC, 372 NLRB No. 130 (2023): The board overruled Linden Lumber and revived aspects of the Joy Silk doctrine, holding that an employer must either recognize a union that presents evidence of majority support or promptly file a Representation Management (RM) petition, and that a subsequent unfair labor practice can justify a bargaining order without requiring a new election.
  12. Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (2023): The board made workplace rules presumptively unlawful if they could be interpreted to limit employee rights based on a “reasonable employee” standard.
  13. The Atlanta Opera, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 95 (2023): The board overruled SuperShuttle DFW and reinstated the FedEx Home Delivery (FedEx II) standard, reaffirming that independent contractor status must be determined by a holistic application of common-law agency factors without elevating entrepreneurial opportunity above all else.
  14. Tesla, Inc., 371 NLRB No. 131 (2022): The Board overruled Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., reaffirming that any employer interference with employees’ display of union insignia is presumptively unlawful and must be justified by “special circumstances” under Republic Aviation.
  15. American Steel Construction, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 23 (2022): The board overruled PCC Structurals and reinstated Specialty Healthcare, restoring the “overwhelming community of interest” standard for assessing whether excluded employees must be included in a petitioned-for bargaining unit.