On August 20, 2024, the District Court for the Northern District of Texas, in Ryan LLC v. FTC, set aside the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) rule banning noncompete agreements. Unlike the court’s limited preliminary injunction issued last month, yesterday’s order applies to all employers nationwide. Accordingly, the FTC’s noncompete ban will no longer be effective on September 4, 2024. An FTC spokesperson said the agency is seriously considering an appeal, and that the decision does not prevent the FTC from addressing noncompetes through case-by-case enforcement actions.

Lawrence & Bundy is pleased to congratulate nine of its attorneys who are recognized in the 2025 edition of Best Lawyers in America®, which was published today.

In a victory for employers committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit rejected an employee’s claim that he suffered a retaliatory termination after refusing to complete unconscious bias training—training designed to improve workplace inclusiveness.

Today, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied a request for a preliminary injunction to enjoin the FTC’s final nationwide noncompete ban rule (ATS Tree Services, LLC v. FTC). The Eastern District of Pennsylvania is now the second court to rule on the FTC’s noncompete rule. The first was the Northern District of Texas in Ryan LLC v. FTC, where the court issued only a limited injunction applicable to the named plaintiffs. Accordingly, no nationwide injunction against the FTC rule currently exists and the rule's September 4, 2024, effective date remains intact. Employers should nevertheless follow these cases for further developments, particularly the Texas case, as the district court has indicated it intends to make a final decision on the merits by August 30, 2024.

Today, in two consolidated cases, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce, the United States Supreme Court held that courts may no longer defer to an agency interpretation of law simply because the law is ambiguous, overruling Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984), and signaling what will likely be a dramatic shift in how federal agencies regulate workplace rules.

This article was written by Allegra Lawrence-Hardy and Lisa Haldar and originally appeared in Law 360

In January, we mapped out 10 resolutions for employers to consider, from artificial intelligence policies to noncompete agreements.[1]

Six months later, regulatory agencies have made moves in rulemaking to further their forecasted priorities. The U.S. Supreme Court has announced a unifying standard for claims of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and courts around the country are continuing the legwork in interpreting the high court's previous clarification of the standard in religious accommodation cases.

In yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Starbucks v. McKinney, the Court held that federal courts must apply the traditional equitable four-factor test when evaluating National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) requests for preliminary injunctive relief. This pivotal ruling resolves a circuit split and, in many jurisdictions, raises the Board’s burden of proof when seeking preliminary injunctive relief. While four U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals already apply the traditional four-factor test, six others use a more lenient standard. Summarized below are our legal analysis of the ruling and recommendations for best practices going forward.

Lawrence & Bundy is pleased to announce that the firm has been ranked in Chambers USA 2024 for another consecutive year in the area of Labor & Employment. Thank you to the entire team for your exceptional work over the past year and for making this recognition possible. We would also like to thank our clients and Georgia market commentators for their recognition of our firm’s accomplishments. We are grateful for the trust and confidence you place in our team

EEOC regulations have expanded coverage beyond what employers might expect. Employers should become familiar with these requirements and take certain risk-reducing actions before the regulations take effect June 18.
 
After a year’s wait, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission published final regulations and interpretive guidance for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA”). These regulations expand coverage beyond what employers might expect. Employers should become familiar with these requirements and take certain risk-reducing actions before the regulations take effect on June 18, 2024.[1]

The United States Supreme Court issued its ruling on Thursday in Harrow v. Department of Defense. The decision directly applies to federal sector employers, but it has broader applications for all final decisions a federal agency makes that can be appealed to a federal court.

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that the 60-day deadline for a federal employee to petition the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to review a final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”) is not jurisdictional. In other words, the Federal Circuit Court had the authority to review the claim even though it was filed outside the 60-day deadline.