On March 6, 2025, U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered that Gwynn Wilcox be reinstated to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and complete her five-year term, which is set to expire on August 27, 2028.
President Trump removed Wilcox—a Democratic appointee to the NLRB and briefly the NLRB chair—from the Board on January 27, 2025, leaving the Board with only two sitting members and without a quorum to hear cases and operate. Wilcox later filed suit challenging her removal, alleging that it violated the National Labor Relations Act because it was without notice or a hearing and without cause.
The reinstatement is significant because it reverses President Trump’s move to shift labor policy away from the union-friendly priorities of his predecessor. The same day he removed Wilcox, President Trump also discharged NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo. President Trump later appointed William B. Cowen as the NLRB’s Acting General Counsel. Cowen has rescinded many of his predecessor’s memoranda that laid out her aggressive, union-friendly policy agenda. For more information, please see our February 17, 2025 Alert.
Judge Howell granted summary judgment for Wilcox on her claims and enjoined NLRB Chair Marvin Kaplan from “removing [Wilcox] from her office without cause,” “treating [her] as having been removed from office,” or “impeding in any way her ability to fulfill her duties as a member of the NLRB.” Wilcox’s legal challenge has raised significant constitutional and separation of powers issues, and Judge Howell’s decision is likely to be appealed. On March 10, 2025, the Trump administration filed a motion for a stay of the order reinstating Wilcox pending appeal of the decision. In the motion, the administration argued the district court’s order “works a grave harm to the separation of powers and undermines the President’s ability to exercise his authority under the Constitution.” The administration further argued that the district court erred in ordering Wilcox reinstated because she will not suffer any irreparable harm in the absence of immediate reinstatement. Finally, the administration argued that an order requiring a President to reinstate a person he has chosen to remove from office is “extraordinary and virtually unheard of,” and “would greatly impede” the President’s authority to exercise “all of” “the executive power” of the United States.
If not stayed by a federal appeals court, the district court’s decision will reinstate Wilcox to the NLRB, at least for now, as the case is likely to be appealed and could potentially land at the Supreme Court, given the novel constitutional questions. Wilcox’s removal had left the NLRB with only two sitting members—Republican-appointee Kaplan and Democratic-appointee David Prouty. Without a quorum, the NLRB had been unable to hear a growing backlog of cases, as discussed in our January 29, 2025 Alert. Now, with a quorum, the NLRB can resume operating.
But that situation may not last. According to the expedited schedule agreed to by the parties, the plaintiff’s response to the motion to stay is due by March 11 and the defendants’ reply by March 13. The court will likely rule on the motion shortly thereafter. A decision granting the motion to stay or ultimately reversing the district court on appeal would drop the Board back to two members. The case could ultimately proceed to the Supreme Court, which also could reverse the district court’s decision, returning the Board to two members.