UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) AMERICAN FEDERATION OF ) GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL- ) CIO, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:18-cv-1261 (KBJ) ) DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION ) NATIONAL FEDERATION OF ) FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, FD-1, ) IAMAW, AFL-CIO, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) AMERICAN FEDERATION OF ) STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL ) EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES ) UNION, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1 II. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................... 7 A. An Historical Overview Of The Management Of Federal Public Employees ....... 7 The Statutory Provisions That Are Relevant To The Instant Dispute ................. 10 1. The Purpose, Structure, And Provisions Of The FSLRMS ........................... 11 2. The Federal Labor Relations Authority ....................................................... 14 3. Relevant Miscellaneous Provisions Of The United States Code ................... 16 The Challenged Executive Orders .................................................................... 17 1. Executive Order 13,836 (“The Collective Bargaining Procedures Order”) ... 17 2. Executive Order 13,837 (“The Official Time Order”) .................................. 19 3. Executive Order 13,839 (“The Removal Procedures Order”) ....................... 23 Procedural History ........................................................................................... 25 III. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS ................................................................. 27 IV. ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 31 This Court Has Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Because Congress Did Not Intend For This Matter To Be Resolved Through The FSLMRS Or CSRA Administrative Review Schemes ...................................................................... 33 1. Both The FSLMRS And The CSRA Evince A Fairly Discernable Congressional Intent To Channel Certain Claims To The FLRA And The MSPB .......................................................................................... 35 2. The Unions’ Claims Are Not Of The Type That Congress Intended To Funnel Through The FLRA or CSRA Statutory Review Schemes ................ 37 a. Meaningful Judicial Review Of The Unions’ Claims Would Be Foreclosed If The District Courts Could Not Hear These Claims ..... 37 b. The Unions’ Claims Are Wholly Collateral To The FSLMRS And The CSRA Administrative-Judicial Review Schemes ............... 48 ii c. Although Potentially Helpful, The Agencies’ Expertise Is Not Essential To Resolving The Instant Claims ..................................... 56 The Unions’ Claims Are Fit For Judicial Resolution......................................... 59 The President Has The Statutory And Constitutional Authority To Issue Executive Orders That Pertain To Federal Labor-Management Relations, So Long As His Orders Do Not Conflict With The Will Of Congress ................ 66 Before The Enactment Of The FSLMRS And CSRA, Presidents Had The Authority To Issue Executive Orders Regulating Federal Labor- Management Relations ................................................................................ 66 2. The FSLMRS And CSRA Did Not Divest The President Of Any Authority In This Field ............................................................................... 71 3. The President’s Executive Orders Concerning This Area Must Be Consistent With Congress’s Pronouncements .............................................. 75 Many Of The Order Provisions The Unions Have Challenged In This Case Impermissibly Infringe Upon The Statutory Right To Bargain Collectively ...... ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals