Author: Zachary L. Miller

As we recently reported, on July 3, 2024, the Northern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction in Ryan LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, staying the effective date of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) rule banning non-competes (the “Rule”) and enjoining the FTC from enforcing the Rule. That injunction, however, was only applicable to the plaintiffs and intervenors in the case and did not address the FTC’s broader enforcement of the Rule.

As we recently reported on April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a final rule banning virtually all future and most existing non-compete clauses. The rule was immediately challenged by a global tax services firm and the United States Chamber of Commerce in the Northern District of Texas, and, soon thereafter, others within the business community took action by filing suit in additional federal courts. This post provides an update on the various ongoing legal challenges unfolding across the country. Ryan LLC v. Federal Trade Commission (N.D. Tex. 2024) On April 24, 2024, Ryan LLC, along with a group of intervenors led by the Chamber of Commerce, challenged the non-compete rule arguing that the rule exceeds the FTC’s statutory authority under the Administrative Procedures Act. On May 10, 2024, the Chamber of Commerce filed a motion to stay the September 4, 2024, effective date of the rule and for a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of the rule, which would have the effect of halting the rule from going into effect until the underlying lawsuit is resolved. The Northern District of Texas court granted the motion, finding that the plaintiffs were likely to prevail on the merits. But the court’s decision came with an important caveat: The court’s order granting the preliminary injunction and halting...

On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a final rule banning all future and most existing non-compete clauses, with few narrow exceptions for senior executives.  The rule, however, was immediately met with legal challenges, casting doubt on its future. The FTC has taken the position that entering into a non-compete agreement is an “unfair method of competition” within the meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act, therefore rendering non-competes unlawful as a general matter. The FTC reasons that a non-compete ban was necessary to address conduct harming fair competition in the labor market, reducing wages, stifling innovation, and hindering business formation and entrepreneurship. Further, the FTC argues that the current state law approach, which assesses the enforceability of non-competes on a case-by-case basis, has not sufficiently addressed the competition concerns cited by the FTC. On the other hand, opponents of the FTC’s non-compete ban argue that the rule exceeds the commission’s statutory and constitutional authority and that non-competes are crucial in guarding an employer’s trade secrets, intellectual property, and significant investments in employee training and development. Key components of the final rule are: It is an “unfair method of competition” for any worker and an employer to enter into, or attempt to enter into, a non-compete clause, to enforce a non-compete clause,...