07-07-2024, 02:36 AM
Apparently, a tax services firm called Ryan, LLC sued the FTC to block the new rule. They were joined by the US Chamber of Commerce, two Texas business groups, and a CEO lobbyist association.
They brought the case to a Texas Federal Judge who has stated that the Federal Trade Commission lacks the legal standing to issue such a rule.
From ArsTechnica: Judge says FTC lacks authority to issue rule banning noncompete agreements
A US judge ruled against the Federal Trade Commission in a challenge to its rule banning noncompete agreements, saying the FTC lacks "substantive" rulemaking authority.
The preliminary ruling only blocks enforcement of the noncompete ban against the plaintiff and other groups that intervened in the case, but it signals that the judge believes the FTC cannot enforce the rule.
The plaintiffs managed to get a judge to concede that the FTC can't enforce such a ban of non-compete clauses because while it has a mandate to curtail and address bad business practices it isn't able to 'enforce' the rule.
Of course this will be rendered into a narrative as a judge usurping the 'domain' of a Federal regulator. Lobbyists will ensure that is featured in their marketing of this dispute.
[Judge] Brown acknowledged that "the FTC has some authority to promulgate rules to preclude unfair methods of competition." But "the text, structure, and history of the FTC Act reveal that the FTC lacks substantive rulemaking authority with respect to unfair methods of competition under Section 6(g)," she wrote.
Anything to keep the lasso around the necks of anyone who dares shun an employer...
Of course the injunction against the FTC rule only applies to those who are bringing suit... "the scope of the injunctive relief herein to named Plaintiff Ryan, LLC and Plaintiff-Intervenors Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America; Business Roundtable; Texas Association of Business; and Longview Chamber of Commerce."
You have to wonder just how 'important' it is to stop employees from being able to leave an employer and work in the same field... as opposed to a "modern version of commerce slavery."
They brought the case to a Texas Federal Judge who has stated that the Federal Trade Commission lacks the legal standing to issue such a rule.
From ArsTechnica: Judge says FTC lacks authority to issue rule banning noncompete agreements
A US judge ruled against the Federal Trade Commission in a challenge to its rule banning noncompete agreements, saying the FTC lacks "substantive" rulemaking authority.
The preliminary ruling only blocks enforcement of the noncompete ban against the plaintiff and other groups that intervened in the case, but it signals that the judge believes the FTC cannot enforce the rule.
The plaintiffs managed to get a judge to concede that the FTC can't enforce such a ban of non-compete clauses because while it has a mandate to curtail and address bad business practices it isn't able to 'enforce' the rule.
Of course this will be rendered into a narrative as a judge usurping the 'domain' of a Federal regulator. Lobbyists will ensure that is featured in their marketing of this dispute.
[Judge] Brown acknowledged that "the FTC has some authority to promulgate rules to preclude unfair methods of competition." But "the text, structure, and history of the FTC Act reveal that the FTC lacks substantive rulemaking authority with respect to unfair methods of competition under Section 6(g)," she wrote.
Anything to keep the lasso around the necks of anyone who dares shun an employer...
Of course the injunction against the FTC rule only applies to those who are bringing suit... "the scope of the injunctive relief herein to named Plaintiff Ryan, LLC and Plaintiff-Intervenors Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America; Business Roundtable; Texas Association of Business; and Longview Chamber of Commerce."
You have to wonder just how 'important' it is to stop employees from being able to leave an employer and work in the same field... as opposed to a "modern version of commerce slavery."
