Austin worker sues Biden-Harris labor board citing constitutional concerns

The federal lawsuit asserts that Mudd is entitled to have his appeal heard by a federal agency accountable to the president. This case is part of a series of constitutional challenges backed by Foundation attorneys against the NLRB's structure based on separation of powers principles. Among these cases is one challenging NLRB Board Member removal protections currently under review at the DC Circuit Court of Appeals involving Starbucks employees Ariana Cortes and Logan Karam.

Mudd’s complaint references recent Supreme Court rulings such as Seila Law LLC v. CFPB and Collins v. Yellen, which emphasize presidential authority over executive officials with significant authority. He argues that restrictions imposed by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) unlawfully limit presidential power over NLRB officials.

Reed Busler, another worker at Starbucks, has filed a similar suit at the same court after his request for an election to remove Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) was also blocked by NLRB officials. In all these cases, employees argue for adjudication before constitutionally compliant Board officials.

National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix stated: “Independent-minded workers should not be forced to depend on biased agencies staffed by bureaucrats that exercise power in violation of the Constitution just to free themselves of unwanted union affiliation.” He added that these legal challenges aim “to ensure that the Labor Board functions within law.”