Client Alerts & Insights
Texas Decision Calls Into Question the Use of Administrative Law Judges
November 5, 2024
Authored By:
On October 30, 2024, a Texas federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) from using its in-house administrative law judges to oversee administrative proceedings against a government contractor for alleged discriminatory hiring practices. This case is one of at least three lawsuits challenging the DOL’s ability to use administrative law judges to resolve claims. Depending on how the other two cases are resolved, there could be a future circuit split on the permissibility of using in-house judges to preside over administrative proceedings, which would then lead to a Supreme Court decision to resolve the split.
The plaintiffs in all three lawsuits argue that administrative law judges are unlawfully insulated from removal by the President and that the issues being brought to them should be tried by a federal judge and jury, not an in-house judge. Relying on Fifth Circuit precedent, the Texas federal judge agreed with ABM Industry Group, the plaintiff in the case, that the DOL’s judicial removal protections for its administrative law judges are unconstitutional but did not address ABM’s Seventh Amendment jury argument.
The other two cases, brought by Perdue Farms and Comcast, are pending in North Carolina and Virginia federal courts, respectively. Both courts sit in the Fourth Circuit and are not bound by the Fifth Circuit precedent relied upon by the Texas federal judge. If a circuit split arises, this issue would be ripe for review by the U.S. Supreme Court. Permitting administrative law judge proceedings in some circuits but not others is not feasible, so it is likely that the Supreme Court would step in.
This issue has far-reaching implications. A similar lawsuit was filed in a Texas federal court by Elon Musk’s SpaceX earlier this year challenging the constitutionality of administrative law judges and board members of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”). Specifically, SpaceX argued that the NLRB’s administrative law judges and board members are unlawfully insulated from at-will removal by the President, and that NLRB proceedings violate its constitutional right to a jury trial. The federal judge granted a preliminary injunction blocking certain NLRB administrative proceedings against SpaceX, and the NLRB subsequently filed an appeal, which is currently pending in the Fifth Circuit.
We will continue to monitor and report on developments as they occur.
For more information, please contact a member of Benesch’s Labor & Employment Practice Group.
Eric Baisden at ebaisden@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.4676.
Adam Primm at aprimm@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.4451.
Hannah J. Kraus at hkraus@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.6109.
Latest News
2026 Proposed Amendments to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines—Key Changes for Economic Crimes
The United States Sentencing Commission (the “Commission”) published its proposed 2026 amendments to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines in two phases—in December 2025 and January 2026—with a period for public comment through February 10, 2026, and March 18, 2026, respectively.
Dance Like No One is Watching, Text Like Your Words Will Be Published on the Front Page: The Importance of Internal Compliance with FINRA and Text Message Production
Earlier this month, Benjamin Edwards, a broker-dealer firm, agreed to a censure and to pay a $750,000 fine for failing to properly supervise and preserve its employees’ business-related text messages.
Increased Medicare Enforcement Forthcoming? Minnesota Legislature, Attorney General Propose Expanded Charging Authority, Higher Penalties
On February 25, 2026, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, together with bipartisan legislative sponsors, introduced the 2026 Medical Assistance Protection Act (“MAP”), a sweeping proposal that would materially expand the state’s Medicaid fraud enforcement framework.
CMS Issues a Nationwide Moratorium on New Medicare Enrollment of Some DMEPOS Suppliers
CMS has imposed a six‑month nationwide moratorium beginning February 27, 2026, that blocks new Medicare enrollments for certain DMEPOS suppliers as part of its CRUSH initiative.