In today’s News and Commentary, a proposal to convert the NLRB into a purely adjudicatory “labor court,” a work stoppage among court-appointed lawyers in Massachusetts, and “portable benefits” laws gaining ground in the states and in Congress.
In the Regulatory Review, OnLabor contributor Samuel Estreicher, G. Roger King, and David S. Sherwyn propose replacing the NLRB with a purely adjudicatory, non-rulemaking “labor court.” Six bipartisan judges (two Democrats, two Republicans, and two independents) serving six-year terms would preside, with four votes required to appoint an administrative law judge or to overturn precedent. The Board’s Office of General Counsel would be statutorily separated from the court. The General Counsel would hold authority over regional offices, administer elections and investigate and prosecute unfair labor practice charges; however, the labor court would be represented in federal courts by a newly created Solicitor. Adversely affected parties by labor court decisions could seek review in federal court, but the General Counsel would not have standing to seek such review. The authors suggest at least two reasons to embrace their proposal. First, the bipartisan, off-cycle appointments of judges and steeper requirements for overturning precedent could address the problem of Board “flip-flopping.” Second — perhaps more urgently, following Supreme Court’s ruling in Wilcox last week — the labor court “would not have any executive authority” and as...
Former President Donald Trump made many statements attacking wind energy. These claims were checked by researchers from Deutsche Welle, FactCheck.org, Time, and more. Many of his claims are not tr...