
Independent regulators in ‘real danger' after Trump firings, say ex-NLRB chairs
Donald Trump has been accused of launching an 'attack on the rule of law' as three former heads of the top US labor watchdog criticized the unprecedented firing of a top official.
The abrupt removal of Gwynne Wilcox from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) leaves the agency 'out of business' unless a replacement is nominated, they warned – and highlights a 'real danger' to the independence of regulators and adjudicators now Trump is back in the White House.
In interviews with The Guardian, previous chairs of the NLRB described the dismissal of Wilcox as a 'usurpation' of power that 'reeks of discriminatory motive'.
The White House blamed decisions taken by Wilcox and Jennifer Abruzzo, the NLRB's general counsel, as it fired the pair earlier this week.
The move leaves the agency's board with only two members, short of the quorum of three required to issue significant decisions on US labor disputes. Wilcox, , the first Black woman to serve on the board, has pledged to pursue 'all legal avenues' to challenge her firing.
'It was unprecedented to have a sitting board member terminated because of her positions that she's taken in cases. That is clearly contrary to law,' said Lauren McFerran, chair of the NLRB until last month, when he reappointment was blocked in the US Senate.. 'In this case, the President made no pretense of accusing member Wilcox of any misconduct, which would be ridiculous.
'She's a dedicated public servant. She had a sterling reputation. He did not, to my knowledge, provide her with any opportunity for a hearing or any advanced notice, he just summarily fired her because he disagreed with her decisions as a board Member. That's never happened before.'
Members of the NLRB, according to the National Labor Relations Act, can only be removed by a President 'for neglect of duty or malfeasance in office, but for no other cause.'
McFerran served as a member of the NLRB from 2014 to 2019, was reappointed under the Trump administration in 2020, and chair the agency from January 2021 until December.
'There is real danger in attacking the existence of independent regulatory agencies, particularly independent adjudicators,' she added. 'Congress made a judgment that certain areas of critical government decision making should be insulated from the day-to-day influence of the president. I think that's particularly important when we're talking about people who are functionally serving as judges.'
McFerran also noted given Wilcox's intent to challenge her removal in court, if new board members are appointed, any decisions made without her can be deemed invalid if her termination is overturned, creating uncertainty for federal labor laws.
'We want parties who bring their cases before agencies like the board to have fair tribunals,' concluded McFerran. 'When I was at the board, I never had to worry that if I was hearing a case and I rejected the position of somebody who was an ally of the president, or even rejected the position of the presidentially appointed general counsel, that it would cost me my job. And that's the environment that future board members could be operating in now, which basically just takes away the independence of independent agencies, and I think that's a real loss for the government.'
Wilma B Liebman, who chaired the NLRB from 2009 to 2011, under Barack Obama, and before that served as a board member under Bill Clinton and George W Bush, called Wilcox's termination 'brazen and shocking, contrary to long existing supreme court precedent, the clear language of the statute (the NLRA), and decades of custom'.
'Singling out a Black woman for termination, reeks of discriminatory motive,' Liebman said. 'The White House is perilously rolling the dice here, but their aim obviously is to cause chaos and impede the Board's operation. Her termination, along with the termination of other members of bipartisan multimember boards or commissions, sets a dangerous precedent and threat to the rule of law, further polarizing and politicizing administrative agency operations and the law.'
This goes 'way beyond the state of polarization and politicization that has existed already for years', she added.
Some NLRB functions, such as processing unfair labor practice charges, do not require three serving board members, while the chief administrative law judge can handle some motions and requests without a quorum on the board. But cases where a board decision is required or requested are effectively halted.
While McFerran noted that a lot of 'routine steps' can continue within the NLRB, she warned: 'Push comes to shove, if any party wants to take advantage of the fact that there's not a quorum of the board to try to kind of to put an indefinite pause on their case, they can pretty easily do so.'
Firms including SpaceX, led by Trump ally Elon Musk, and Amazon have filed challenges against the NLRB in court, alleging the agency is unconstitutional. Federal courts are currently reviewing many of these cases, which could eventually reach the Supreme Court.
William B Gould IV, NLRB chair from 1994 to 1998, claimed Wilcox's termination was a bid to weaken the labor movement.
'Trump is playing a role, that he is well used to, and that is the role of usurping the rule of law,' he said. 'I think it's usurpation and an attack on the rule of law to politicize in a way which Congress and the Constitution never intended, to allow for the dismissal of board members when the President doesn't like what they've done.'
It is unclear how the courts will rule on the termination, Gould noted, particularly given the conservative makeup of the supreme court, should it hear the case. Butin the mean time, the removal will 'paralyze the board and put the board adjudicatively out of business', he said, 'which is exactly what Mr Trump and his allies would want, because it promotes the democracy for workers, and they don't want that.'.
A White House official said: 'These were far-left appointees with radical records of upending longstanding labor law, and they have no place as senior appointees in the Trump Administration, which was given a mandate by the American people to undo the radical policies they created.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

South Wales Argus
19 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Race Council Cymru on racial justice five years after Newport protest
Five years ago today, on the 11th of June 2020, more than a thousand people gathered in Newport to support the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, joining the millions worldwide standing against racial inequality. At the time, the Black Lives Matter movement, whilst not a new movement, had gained a substantial amount of momentum internationally following the death of George Floyd in the US. Race Council Cymru (RCC), work with key organisations in Wales to combat racial inequality, recall that point in time as a turning point, not only around the world but within Wales. 'People took to the streets, to screens, to classrooms, and to their hearts to say: enough is enough,' they explained. In Newport, a city known for its cultural diversity, people came together in protest against racial inequality, raising placards, kneeling in silence, and pledging to be part of the change. At the time, the world was amid a global pandemic, and there were concerns surrounding public gatherings. Nevertheless, supporters of the movement left the safety of their homes anyway, sending a powerful message. Various protests took place throughout Wales, sparking important conversations about racism, about the systems we live under and about racial inequality in Wales. In the five years since, Wales has seen many significant changes which seek to ensure racial equality. In 2022, the Welsh Government launched an Anti-Racist Wales Action Plan, with the ambition of creating an anti-racist nation by the year 2030. Wales is also said to be the first UK nation to make the teaching of Black, Asian, and minority ethnic histories mandatory in schools, recognising that Black history is Welsh history. Nevertheless, Race Council Cymru highlights that positive progress has not erased racial inequality in Wales. 'There is progress. But there is also pain. While the conversation around race has evolved, racism has not disappeared,' they said. 'Hate crime in Wales remains a serious concern,' they added. Reminding the public to recognise the human being behind each crime statistic. As the years pass since the BLM protests, organisations such as Race Council Cymru continue to push for racial equality in Wales. 'We cannot and will not allow racism to go unchallenged. Not in our streets. Not in our institutions. Not in our silence,' they declared. Race Council Cymru invited everyone to take a stand, saying: 'Use your voice. Support our work. Speak up when you see injustice. Teach your children about the value of every human life.' 'Let's build a Wales where every person, regardless of race, background or belief, feels safe, respected, and heard,' they said.


NBC News
2 days ago
- NBC News
Steve Kornacki: The geographic dividing lines shaping New Jersey's primary
Rep. Mikie Sherrill heads into Tuesday's primary as the favorite to win the Democratic nomination for governor of New Jersey. She has blanketed the pricey New York and Philadelphia metro airwaves with television ads, she enjoys the backing of much of the party's establishment, and she had opened double-digit leads in two polls that were released several weeks ago. There is uncertainty, though. Credible public polling has, overall, been limited and infrequent. And court-imposed changes to the layout of the primary ballot could dramatically dilute the power of the endorsements Sherrill has received from key county Democratic organizations. Sherrill's opponents have each made inroads. But, at least so far, that seems to have had the effect of keeping them in one another's way, preventing one from emerging as the clear alternative to Sherrill. Consider the state's political geography. You can draw a line south of Mercer and Monmouth counties, roughly where Route 195 would be on a map. Below that is South Jersey. Democratic politics here are dominated by an old-fashioned political machine that is backing the lone South Jersey candidate in the field: former state Sen. Steve Sweeney. The trouble for Sweeney is that only about 30% of all primary votes will come from tis region. And because South Jersey is part of the Philadelphia media market, he's not well-known in the rest of the state, which is served heavily by the New York market. And to the extent he is known, Sweeney's connection to the South Jersey machine is a liability. According to a May Insider NJ poll, conducted by StimSight Research, more Democratic voters said the term 'typical machine politician' applies to him than any other candidate. No wonder he has lagged far behind in polling. Then there's vote-rich North Jersey, where the other candidates can all claim some advantage. Newark Mayor Ras Baraka is likely to win his city — the state's largest — overwhelmingly. Newark is also the seat of Essex County, which has more registered Democrats than any other county. More than 40% of Essex's population is Black, which should further boost Baraka, the lone Black candidate in the race. Nearby Union County, which has the second-highest share of Black residents, could offer another trove of votes. Baraka has also made a wider play for the party's progressive base. He has run hard to the left, and he burnished his anti-Trump credentials when he was arrested at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility last month. Coupled with deep Black support, that could be the makings of a potent coalition in a statewide primary. But Baraka has encountered traffic in the progressive lane thanks to the presence of Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop, who is also embracing left-wing themes and has framed his candidacy as a war on the Democratic establishment. Insider NJ's poll asked Democrats whether any of the candidates stood out to them as being 'a true progressive.' Baraka and Fulop were cited more than anyone else — by far. In other words, they are each garnering support the other could badly use. Another candidate, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, has pitched his message more toward the middle, promising tax cuts and emphasizing cost-of-living issues. Gottheimer won his House seat by flipping what had been a reliably Republican district, and he has amassed an enviable campaign bankroll. He figures to perform strongly in suburban Bergen County, his political base, and he has been endorsed by Bergen's official Democratic organization. But when he entered the race, Gottheimer was counting on his perceived electability to gain the support of multiple major county organizations in North Jersey — not just his home county. Those organizations retain the feeling of old political machines, with their own formidable turnout operations and the ability to spend on their preferred candidates' behalf. Last year, Gottheimer seemed to notch a big one, when leaders from Hudson County (which includes Fulop's Jersey City) gave him their support. It was, he hoped, the first of many big dominoes to fall. But that deal crumbled apart over the winter, and the Hudson organization instead endorsed Sherrill. And Gottheimer kept missing out, too. Besides Bergen's, his only other party endorsement comes from tiny rural Warren County in the northwest corner of the state. Instead, it was Sherrill and her perceived electability that those county machines decided to go in with. Like Gottheimer, she also flipped a longtime GOP seat en route to Congress and has been a potent fundraiser. Her background as a Navy fighter pilot has also been a key selling point. Outside of Bergen's, Sherrill has won the endorsement of every major county machine in North Jersey — which as a region will produce about 70% of all votes in the primary. The near-unanimous show of establishment support has created a sense of momentum around Sherrill's campaign and sent a signal to donors and other influencers to get on board. And that's on top of the practical get-out-the-vote advantage it provides her. That having been said, there's a major ingredient missing this year: 'the line.' In the past, county parties would have been able to provide Sherrill with a highly preferential spot on primary ballots. But a court ruling undid that power last year. To what extent that dulls the power of the machines in primary elections is something everyone will be watching for in Tuesday's results. Still, Sherrill has managed to avoid the downsides of being associated with establishment politics. Only 20% of Democrats say the term 'typical machine politician' fits her — half the percentage who said the same about Sweeney in the same Insider NJ poll. That poll also found that an outright majority of Democrats said she could win the November election, far more than anyone else. Each major candidate will have pockets of deep support Tuesday. In polls and endorsements, though, Sherrill has shown the potential to perform well across the board, even in counties where she isn't the top vote-getter. If she can realize that potential Tuesday, victory will be hers. But it has to be said that we are flying blind here. If the dynamics of the race have shifted in the last few weeks, there has been almost no public polling that would catch it. And the demise of 'the line' has pushed the primary further into uncharted territory. The history of New Jersey Democratic primaries says Sherrill should win — but is history still worth anything in 2025?

ITV News
2 days ago
- ITV News
Reeves signs off on £14bn to build new nuclear plant Sizewell C
Rachel Reeves has signed off on £14.2 billion of investment to build the new Sizewell C nuclear plant as part of the spending review. The Chancellor is set to confirm the funding at the GMB Congress on Tuesday. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said new nuclear power capacity was needed to deliver a 'golden age of clean energy abundance'. Trade unions welcomed the move, which the Treasury said would go towards creating 10,000 jobs, including 1,500 apprenticeships. But the head of a campaign group opposing the plant criticised the decision to commit the funding, saying it is still not clear what the total cost will be. Nuclear plants are seen as increasingly important electricity sources as the Government tries to decarbonise Britain's grid by 2030, replacing fossil fuels with green power. The last time Britain completed one was in 1987, which was the Sizewell B plant. Hinkley Point C, in Somerset, is under construction and is expected to produce enough power for about six million homes when it opens, but that may not be until 2031. The Energy Secretary said: 'We need new nuclear to deliver a golden age of clean energy abundance, because that is the only way to protect family finances, take back control of our energy, and tackle the climate crisis. 'This is the Government's clean energy mission in action – investing in lower bills and good jobs for energy security.' It will get the UK off the 'fossil fuel rollercoaster', he separately told The Guardian. 'We know that we're going to have to see electricity demand at least double by 2050. All the expert advice says nuclear has a really important role to play in the energy system. 'In any sensible reckoning, this is essential to get to our clean power and net zero ambitions.' The joint managing directors of Sizewell C, Julia Pyke and Nigel Cann, said: 'Today marks the start of an exciting new chapter for Sizewell C, the UK's first British-owned nuclear power plant in over 30 years.' At the peak of construction, Sizewell C is expected to provide 10,000 jobs and the company behind the project has already signed £330 million worth of contracts with local businesses. The plant, which will power the equivalent of six million homes, is planned to be operational in the 2030s. The Government is also due to confirm one of Europe's first small modular reactor programmes and will invest £2.5 billion over five years in fusion energy research as part of plans to boost the UK's nuclear industry. The GMB union said giving Sizewell C the go-ahead was 'momentous'. Regional Secretary Warren Kenny said: 'Nuclear power is essential for clean, affordable, and reliable energy – without new nuclear, there can be no net zero. 'Sizewell C will provide thousands of good, skilled, unionised jobs and we look forward to working closely with the Government and Sizewell C to help secure a greener future for this country's energy sector.' Mike Clancy, general secretary of Prospect, said: 'Delivering this funding for Sizewell C is a vital step forward, this project is critical to securing the future of the nuclear industry in the UK. 'New nuclear is essential to achieving net zero, providing a baseload of clean and secure energy, as well as supporting good, unionised jobs. 'Further investment in SMRs and fusion research shows we are finally serious about developing a 21st-century nuclear industry. All funding must be backed up by a whole-industry plan to ensure we have the workforce and skills we need for these plans to succeed.' Alison Downes of Stop Sizewell C said ministers had not 'come clean' about the full cost of the project, which the group have previously estimated could be some £40 billion. 'There still appears to be no final investment decision for Sizewell C, but £14.2 billion in taxpayers' funding, a decision we condemn and firmly believe the government will come to regret. 'Where is the benefit for voters in ploughing more money into Sizewell C that could be spent on other priorities, and when the project will add to consumer bills and is guaranteed to be late and overspent just like Hinkley C? 'Ministers have still not come clean about Sizewell C's cost and, given negotiations with private investors are incomplete, they have signed away all leverage and will be forced to offer generous deals that undermine value for money. Starmer and Reeves have just signed up to HS2 mark 2.'