On August 1, 2025, a three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted an emergency stay of the district court’s preliminary injunction that had blocked implementation of Executive Order 14251. The order categorically excluded many federal agencies from collective bargaining with federal employee unions under the Federal Service Labor‑Management Relations Statute (FSLMRS), citing national security concerns.
The Executive Order signed by President Trump modified Executive Order 12171 of November 19, 1979, signed by President Jimmy Carter. That Executive Order was entitled Exclusions from the Federal Labor-Management Relations Program. The new Order significantly expands the Carter Order.
These agencies will be excluded from being covered by the federal labor relations statute because they “are hereby determined to have as a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work. It is also hereby determined that Chapter 71 of title 5, United States Code, cannot be applied to these agencies and agency subdivisions in a manner consistent with national security requirements and considerations.”
- Department of State
- Department of Defense, except for any subdivisions excluded pursuant to section 4 of the Executive Order of March 27, 2025, entitled ‘Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs’
- Department of the Treasury, except the Bureau of Engraving and Printing
- Department of Veterans Affairs
- Department of Justice
- International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce
- Environmental Protection Agency
- United States Agency for International Development
- Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- National Science Foundation
- United States International Trade Commission
- Federal Communications Commission
- General Services Administration
The Order also excludes significant portions of the Department of Health and Human Services, Department of the Interior, Homeland Security, FEMA, most of the Department of Energy, and major portions of the Department of Agriculture.
The district court, presided over by Judge Donato, had issued a preliminary injunction on June 24, 2025, finding plaintiffs—including six federal employee unions such as AFGE—likely to prevail on the claim that the Order constituted First Amendment retaliation, chilling union speech by targeting agencies whose union leadership had spoken critically of the administration. The district court further determined that the unions would suffer irreparable harm through dues losses, diminished bargaining rights, and weakened financial support.
Impact on Federal Employee Unions and Employees Represented by Unions
Federal employee unions are directly affected by this decision. First, the Executive Order mandated that agency heads reassign employees previously engaging in union duties back to performing agency business once the collective bargaining agreements were terminated. This will impact a union’s use of “official time.” Official time is a practice allowing a federal employee to work on behalf of a union but still being paid by the government and still receiving full federal employee salary and benefits.
Second, this order means that collective bargaining rights in affected agencies are or will soon be temporarily suspended. Unions lose formal input during contract renegotiations, including mid-term bargaining, and implementation of new agency policies and procedures. In practice, this will speed up changes the administration is making in agencies as the unions’ ability to delay change by engaging in lengthy negotiations will be halted in these agencies.
Third, federal employee dues being deducted by agencies and given to federal employee unions will be significantly reduced. Union viability may suffer due to loss of access and the inability to enforce existing agreements.
An indication of the impact of the executive order on federal employee unions, Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), has said the union cut its staff and that the executive order removed over 200,000 of its dues-paying members. “It’s going to be devastating,” according to AFGE’s National President. This statement was made prior to the latest court decisions denying an injunction on the implementation of the executive order.
As noted by OPM in guidance to agencies issued on March 27, 2025:
The FSLMRS requires agencies to deduct union dues from employees’ pay upon request. Agency resources are expended to set up those payroll deductions and process payments, and manyagency CBAs contractually commit agencies to making such allotments according to specified procedures. When a covered agency terminates its CBAs, those contractual commitments no longer apply, and the covered agency should terminate allotments except where required by statute. Agency employees may make other arrangements for dues payments if they wish to do so. However, agency resources ordinarily should not be expended to facilitate payment of union dues.
Fourth, federal employee unions may lose recourse under First Amendment retaliation claims if the exclusion is upheld on appeal.
Federal employees who were represented by these unions will also be impacted. This latest decision reinforces another appeals court decision with a similar conclusion. It means an agency can introduce unilateral changes in working conditions, performance management, discipline, or reassignments without union involvement.
Federal employees also lose a mechanism to challenge workplace policies and contest agency actions.
Next Steps & Timeline to Final Resolution
An appeal is now underway in the Ninth Circuit on the merits of the case underlying the preliminary injunction.
Parallel litigation is proceeding in the D.C. Circuit. Similar preliminary injunctions were also canceled by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals in related challenges using similar reasoning to the latest decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
There is likely to be a multi-year legal saga to resolve the questions in this case, potentially lasting into 2026-2027. Unions are challenging the president’s authority to issue this Order in several states. Before there is a final decision on Executive Order 14251, it is likely the case will go before the US Supreme Court.
In the meantime, agencies will probably be implementing the Executive Order in question in this latest case (and other executive orders). That appears to be a main point in guidance issued to agencies back in March, and the financial impact on unions that has already been noted will continue to take a toll on the unions for the immediate future.
Goal of the Trump Administration
The Executive Order in this case outlined the President’s goals in issuing this Order. In a Fact Sheet accompanying the Order, the administration wrote:
President Trump is taking action to ensure that agencies vital to national security can execute their missions without delay and protect the American people. The President needs a responsive and accountable civil service to protect our national security.
- Certain Federal unions have declared war on President Trump’s agenda.
- The largest Federal union describes itself as “fighting back” against Trump. It is widely filing grievances to block Trump policies.
- For example, VA’s unions have filed 70 national and local grievances over President Trump’s policies since the inauguration—an average of over one a day.
- Protecting America’s national security is a core constitutional duty, and President Trump refuses to let union obstruction interfere with his efforts to protect Americans and our national interests.
- President Trump supports constructive partnerships with unions who work with him; he will not tolerate mass obstruction that jeopardizes his ability to manage agencies with vital national security missions.
The administration would undoubtedly declare it is now meeting these goals with the latest Court of Appeals decisions upholding at least the temporary implementation of the Executive Order banning unions from many federal agencies.
Union Position on Executive Order Banning Collective Bargaining
Despite the financial pressure and legal pressure facing the union, AFGE is putting on a brave face regarding the issues in this Executive Order. When the Order was issued, AFGE wrote in a press release entitled Lawsuit alleges union-busting executive order is retaliation against labor unions that have challenged the administration’s illegal workplace actions:
AFGE is not going to be intimidated by a bully who is throwing a temper tantrum because our union is beating them in the court of law and in the court of public opinion. Federal employees have had the right to join a union and bargain collectively for decades – through multiple wars, international conflicts, and a global health emergency during President Trump’s first term. During all that time they served the American people with honor and distinction. No one, including President Trump, ever suggested unions were a national security concern. Trump’s newest order to revoke union rights is a clear case of retaliation. But I’ve got news for him: we are not going anywhere.
A press release from the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) stated, in part:
President Trump’s order stripping frontline federal employees of their lawful right to organize is a brazen, illegal attack on workers and unions….
The Executive Order plainly punishes NTEU for its legal challenges to this administration’s actions, cancelling, as relevant here, twelve of NTEU’s collective bargaining relationships, including NTEU’s largest and longest one at the IRS.
Prior to the decisions from the two courts of appeals denying a stay of the Order, AFGE’s national president said, “It’s going to be devastating,” and the article noted, “AFGE’s National Executive Council last month approved a plan to slash its staffing levels from 355 to 151. The union has offered early retirements and buyouts to some staff, and employees are anticipating layoffs in the coming days.”
NTEU has felt similar results.
Automatic dues withholding has been halted in affected agencies, causing NTEU to lose over $1 million in a single pay period. The union estimates monthly losses of around $2 million and warns that roughly 60,000 of its 160,000 total members fall within excluded agencies.
According to legal filings, these financial hits and decline in membership threaten NTEU’s bargaining power and operational viability if the EO remains in effect.
It now looks like the actual survival of some unions representing the federal government may be at stake with the latest court decision effectively giving agencies approval to implement the Order. While no one knows how long before a final decision will be issued, or if the final decision will help the unions recover when it is issued, the unions may be a shadow of their former size and effectiveness when all is said and done.
Actions taken by the administration to reorganize and restructure the federal government are going on despite the large legal effort to impede their implementation. The final impact on the government and on the unions that represent federal employees remains to be seen. There is no doubt that the administration’s efforts represent the biggest threat to the survival of these unions since President Kennedy issued Executive Order 10988, which created the unions after they played a major role in his presidential campaign.
