Starbucks Workers Lose DC Circuit Challenge to Labor Board (2)

A federal appeals court rejected two Starbucks Corp. workers’ bid for a judgment finding National Labor Relations Board members’ removal protections violate the US Constitution.

The NLRB agreed with the workers that the board members’ job shields should be invalid, meaning that the case lacks the adversity element the court needs to assert jurisdiction and rule on it, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held Tuesday.

The decision signals that the NLRB dropping its defense of members’ removal safeguards may save it from needing to litigate that issue in the constitutional lawsuits that several employers have brought against the agency. The job shields’ validity is likely to be resolved in fired NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox’s bid to win court enforcement of those protections, though a preliminary order from the US Supreme Court keeping her on the sidelines shows she will have to overcome resistance among the conservative justices.

The Starbucks workers—represented by the anti-union National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation—sued the NLRB in 2023, after the agency tossed their attempts to eject Starbucks Workers United from stores in the Buffalo, N.Y., area until it resolves related unfair labor practice cases.

But the dispute shifted after President Donald Trump axed Wilcox. The agency changed its litigation position, dropping its argument that the members’ removal shields are constitutional to conform with the view of the Trump administration.

The DC Circuit said that it can’t assert jurisdiction over the case because workers Ariana Cortes and Logan Karam aren’t trying to obtain “adverse forms of relief” that would require the NLRB to act.

“They seek only to have a court say what the government has already said—the Board’s tenure protections are unconstitutional,” Judge Patricia Millett, an Obama appointee, wrote for the court. “In other words, Ms. Cortes and Mr. Karam have not sought any relief from this court that the government has refused to provide.”

Millett’s opinion was joined by Judges Sri Srinivasan, an Obama appointee, and Bradley Garcia, a Biden appointee.

The NLRB declined to comment.

National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix said he was disappointed that the DC Circuit ruled against the workers.

“Cortes and Karam’s lawsuit was the first challenge to the NLRB’s constitutionality based on Board members’ removal protections,” Mix said in a statement. “It is not surprising to us that the U.S. Supreme Court has preliminarily ruled in their favor, and we expect the High Court will ultimately fully vindicate their argument against the NLRB’s unconstitutional structure, whether these employees have standing or not.”

The case is Cortes v. NLRB, D.C. Cir., No. 24-05152, 7/22/25.