Judge Sean Jordan, nominated by Donald Trump to the federal district court for the Eastern District of Texas, issued a ruling that invalidated nationwide overtime rules that helped over four million workers. The US Department of Labor promulgated the rules. The November 2024 decision is State of Texas v US Department of Labor.
What is this case about?
In April 2024, the Department issued new regulations that increased by more than four million the number of workers entitled to receive overtime pay. As the Department has done in the past, the rules raised the minimum salary level of executive, administrative and professional employees who are eligible for overtime, in this case to around $58,000 per year.
The state of Texas, along with a number of organizations representing business corporations and other employers, filed suit challenging the rules, claiming the Department did not have the authority to issue them. In late June, Judge Jordan issued a preliminary injunction that stopped the implementation of the rules as to Texas as an employer. All parties then filed motions for summary judgment, seeking to resolve the issue of the validity of the rules across the country.
How did Judge Jordan rule and why is it important?
Judge Jordan sided with Texas and the corporations, and entered summary judgment that invalidated the overtime rules throughout the country. This resulted in depriving four million workers of the right to overtime pay. Although his ruling clearly contradicted the Department’s interpretation of the relevant statute, Judge Jordan expressly relied on the recent Supreme Court decision in the Loper Bright case that overruled the Chevron doctrine concerning deference to agencies’ interpretation of statutes and stated that courts must use their “independent judgment” in deciding whether an agency has “acted within its statutory authority.”
Judge Jordan’s opinion is obviously harmful to the four million employees throughout the country who have lost their right to overtime pay. Although the current Justice Department can file an appeal of the ruling, whether the Justice Department under Trump will pursue such an appeal after January 20 is uncertain at best. The decision is also an example of the concrete harm, in this case to workers across the country, stemming from the Supreme Court’s determination to overrule the Chevron doctrine. Overall, the ruling provides yet another example of the danger that Trump judges pose to all of us.