Appeals Court Allows Trump Order That Ends Union Protections for Federal Workers

The New York Times ^ | Aug. 1, 2025, 8:40 p.m. ET | Chris Cameron

[E. Pluribus Unum]

A famously liberal circuit court ruled in President Trump’s favor, authorizing a component of his sweeping effort to assert more control over the federal bureaucracy.

A federal appeals court on Friday allowed President Trump to move forward with an order instructing a broad swath of government agencies to end collective bargaining with federal unions.

The ruling authorizes a component of Mr. Trump’s sweeping effort to assert more control over the federal work force to move forward, for now, while the case plays out in court.

It is unclear what immediate effect the ruling will have: The appeals court noted that the affected agencies had been directed to refrain from ending any collective bargaining agreement until “litigation has concluded,” but also noted that Mr. Trump was now free to follow through with the order at his discretion.

Mr. Trump had framed his order stripping workers of labor protections as critical to protect national security. But the plaintiffs — a group of affected unions representing over a million federal workers — argued in a lawsuit that the order was a form of retaliation against those unions that have participated in a barrage of lawsuits opposing Mr. Trump’s policies.

The unions pointed to statements from the White House justifying the order that said “certain federal unions have declared war on President Trump’s agenda” and that the president “will not tolerate mass obstruction that jeopardizes his ability to manage agencies with vital national security missions.”

But a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, a famously liberal jurisdiction, ruled in Mr. Trump’s favor, writing that “the government has shown that the president would have taken the same action even in the absence” of the union lawsuits. Even if...

[frank ballenger]

Franklin D. Roosevelt loved unions and union support but even he opposed unions for federal workers.

“He believed government employees had a unique obligation to the public, which made the traditional collective bargaining model problematic.
He opposed strikes by federal employees, viewing them as unacceptable attempts to obstruct government operations.
He expressed these sentiments in a 1937 letter to the National Federation of Federal Employees, stating that “militant tactics have no place” and collective bargaining couldn’t be simply transplanted to the public service.”

[BobL]

Government labor unions are even worse than private sector unions, and that is saying something. In the private sector, the objective of unions is to bring down companies, in the government sector, it is to bring down leaders they don’t like, as Trump found out.

[ridesthemiles]

THIS IS A GIANT STEP FORWARD.....

[SuperLuminal]

Yikes!
Unbelievable...
At last...

[Mustangman]

I’m all for unions… except government unions. I’m not for those.

[SuperLuminal]

The federal workforce (civil service) played a major role in maintaining government stability during the Depression and, later, throughout WWII...

On the other hand, the unions attempted to destabilize the Nation during both the Depression and WWII.

[Semper Vigilantis]

As far as I am concerned if you receive TAX DOLLARS to do a job then you are NOT allowed to unionize. That includes working for a company that accepts Tax dollars (Fed Funds).
If you don’t like your job, how you are treated, or how much you make, LEAVE.

[DugwayDuke]

“But the plaintiffs — a group of affected unions representing over a million federal workers...”
Actually, those plaintiffs just want to preserve their ability to fill their coffers with union dues.

[jimtorr]

....unions attempted to destabilize the Nation during both the Depression and WWII.

Yes. The ones I recall immediately are coal miners, railroad and longshoremen. Even in Australia during the war, longshoremen at first refused to work American shipping.

[joshua c]

i keep checking the inventory in my 30% fed gov neighborhood

hasnt been any change yet

guess everyone is sitting tight

[HYPOCRACY]

States should follow the lead.

[yuleeyahoo]

I have no issues with trade unions. Public unions are an abomination and should be banned.

[Jeff Chandler]

Nationwide injunction from obscure district judge in 3, 2, 1 . . .

[Reily]

Yes the real growth in government unions is at the state, county & city level. Here Monongalia County, WV the UMW (Yes the United Mine Workers!) organized\recruited the County Assessor’s office.

WV is now a Right-to-Work state, passed by the legislature in 2016 then fought in court until 2020 where the state Supreme court upheld the law.

[bk1000]

This is great. Unions should never get one dime of taxpayer money. Government worker unions should not be allowed to exist.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Next target; teacher’s unions.

[fella]

Unionized Government workers is Tyranny by the unelected.

[XRdsRev]

If Federal workers cannot collectively bargain, then they should be given the right to strike which they currently are not allowed to do.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

If Federal workers cannot collectively bargain, then they should be given the right to strike which they currently are not allowed to do.

Why?

Are taxpayers allowed to strike?