Federal Worker Labor Contracts Restored by California Judge (1)

The Trump administration may not proceed with its efforts to nullify collective bargaining agreements for federal workers in nearly two dozen agencies after another judge issued an injunction to block an executive order stripping certain federal employees of union protections.

The American Federation of Government Employees and other unions showed a “strong likelihood of irreparable harm from the loss of their collective bargaining and allied rights” under federal labor law, that the balance of hardships tips in their favor, and that an injunction would be in the public interest, Judge James Donato of the US District Court for the Northern District of California held Tuesday.

The agency defendants, which include the departments of Labor, State, Defense, Health and Human Services, Interior, and Education, among others, are preliminarily enjoined from implementing or enforcing the Executive Order against the plaintiff unions and their members, Donato said. “The injunction will remain in place further order of the Court,” he added.

Trump’s March executive order, which declared over 40 agencies and sub-agencies exempt from union protections, sparked a series of lawsuits. First, the administration sued the National Treasury Employees’ Union and AFGE in Texas and Kentucky, seeking conservative judges to bless their cancellations of the union contracts.

The Kentucky judge dismissed the government’s case, saying it lacked standing and jurisdiction to sue.

NTEU counter-sued in D.C., where Judge Paul Friedman issued an injunction to block the executive order. That injunction was stayed by a D.C. Circuit panel but the union has asked the entire court to weigh in.

First Amendment Focus

AFGE and a coalition of other unions—including National Nurses United, the Service Employees’ International Union, and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees—took their suit to California, centering their case on First Amendment claims.

While the government’s judgment concerning national security should be given “significant weight,” that doesn’t give them deference to violate the First Amendment and retaliate against the unions for their constitutionally-protected activities, Donato said in his opinion.

A White House fact sheet laid out the motivations for the executive order, saying the purpose was to “end collective bargaining with federal unions” who opposed Trump’s policies and actions. AFGE has sued the administration many times since Trump took office in January, and the unions in the suit have all spoken out against his policies.

“The unions’ statements are quintessential utterances of ‘political expression’ that are cloaked in the ‘broadest protection’ accorded under the First Amendment,” Donato said. “Plaintiffs have demonstrated a serious question under the First Amendment that warrants preserving the status quo pending further litigation.”

The coalition of unions categorized Trump’s order as illegal union busting and applauded Donato’s findings in a joint statement.

“Judge Donato’s ruling is a resounding rejection of the Trump administration’s authoritarian tactics and its sham invocation of national security as a cover for union busting,” said David Holway, president of the National Association of Government Employees. “The court made it clear: national security cannot be used as a smokescreen to silence federal workers. No president is above the law.”

The unions were represented by attorneys with Bredhoff & Kaiser, PLLC, Feinberg Jackson Worthman & Wasow LLP, in addition to their own counsel. Justice Department lawyers represented the administration.

The case is AFGE v. Trump, N.D. Cal., No. 3:25-cv-03070, 6/24/25.