Teamsters confront XPO CEO for ignoring workers

As Bradley Jacobs CEO of XPO Logistics delivered his keynote speech to a conference on global logistics being held in Long Beach, California, he could faintly hear his name being called.

The faint voice grew louder, and as it turns out, it wasn’t a single voice; instead, it was the united voice of 100 Teamsters and their supporters, who had marched into the hotel lobby where the conference was being held chanting, “Bradley Jacobs you can’t hide, we can see your greedy side.”

Some of the members of the group chanting in the hotel lobby were XPO workers who voted to join the Teamsters in union representation elections. Even though XPO workers voted to unionize in a number of election overseen by the US National Labor Relations Board, Jacobs and XPO’s executive management refuse to meet and bargain with the new Teamster members.

The new union workers at XPO say that they unionized because of low pay and the lack of benefits.

“XPO’s Board of Directors just authorized a $110 million stock bonus plan for Bradley Jacobs. Meanwhile, my coworkers and I package and distribute parts for military helicopters to governments all over the world, yet at $12 an hour we can’t support our families without government assistance,” said Monica Abraham, an XPO warehouse worker in New Haven, Connecticut.

Instead of listening to the workers’ grievances, Jacobs ignored them and tried to block their attempts to unionize.

“When we raised concerns with management we were ignored, so we decided to organize,” said Ryan Janota, a freight driver at XPO in Aurora, Illinois. “Instead of respecting our rights, XPO spent a fortune on high-priced union-busting consultants to try and silence us. It didn’t work and we elected to join the Teamsters so Bradley Jacobs will have to listen!”

New XPO Teamster members were joined in the hotel lobby by shorthaul truck drivers at the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. They work for XPO, but, according to the workers, the company misclassifies them as independent contractors.

“Because XPO treats us like employees but pays us as ‘independent contractors’ and deducts their truck expenses from our paychecks, there are many weeks when we don’t even earn the minimum wage,” said Luis Meza, an XPO shorthaul driver. “This is abuse and that’s why my co-workers and I have filed lawsuits against XPO.”

The drivers’ suit alleges that XPO has committed  wage theft by misclassifying them as independent contractors.

XPO workers and other Teamsters were joined in the hotel lobby by members of Clergy & Laity United for Economic Justice, a faith-based social justice organization and the Los Alliance for a New Economy.

William Carr, a Catholic priest from Los Angeles spoke to Jacobs from the hotel lobby over a bullhorn.

“The Church teaches that worker rights are God-given rights,” said Carr. “These workers are here today demanding to speak to you Bradley Jacobs. You have repeatedly refused to meet with them. You must stop interfering with and begin respecting  the XPO workers’ federally protected right to organize a union. This is a God-given right.”

“What you’re doing is immoral,” said another clergy member who didn’t give his name. “Listen to your workers.”

Union fights Trumpcare’s proposal to tax employee health benefits

This week, members of UNITE HERE will be visiting local offices of their US senators and representatives to tell them to oppose a Republican-proposed tax on employee health insurance benefits.

UNITE HERE is the union of 270,000 workers employed in the the hotel, gaming, food service, manufacturing, textile, distribution, laundry, transportation, and airport industries.

A draft of a Republican proposal to repeal and replace Affordable Care Act (ACA), or Obamacare, began circulating among members of Congress on February 10.

A key feature of this proposal is a new tax on workers’ health care benefits.

The new tax on workers’ health care benefits would replace a tax on the wealthy, which currently helps fund subsidies that middle- and low-income workers use to purchase health insurance on the federal and state insurance market exchanges.

The GOP plan, also called Trumpcare, could be introduced in Congress by as early as this week.

UNITE HERE called Trumpcare’s tax on employee health care benefits a “double-whammy” on working class health care.

“The GOP is replacing Obamacare with Trumpcare, which will destroy the best aspects of the ACA while imposing one of the largest tax increases on the American middle class ever leveled by a political party,” said Mike Casey, chairperson of UNITE HERE’s Health Care Task Force. “Over 177 million Americans who depend on employer based health care for their health and well-being will soon be hit with a double-whammy by the GOP Trumpcare plan: a huge new tax on their health benefits followed by higher premiums, higher deductibles and less access to quality care. The GOP is walking the plank with Trumpcare and will soon be swimming with the wrath of an American middle class furious with their dramatic tax increase and cut in health care benefits.”

While UNITE HERE members are talking to senators and representatives about the health care benefits tax, media ads funded by the Working Americans for Affordable Health Care PAC will be informing the public about the new Trumpcare tax proposal.

Some media ads will begin running this week in five US House of Representative districts in California, Indiana, Missouri, and Virginia.

Those five districts are currently represented by Ann Wagner (R-MO), Steve Knight (R-CA), Darrell Issa (R-CA), Barbara Comstock (R-VA) and Luke Messer (R-IN).

In addition to raising taxes on workers, Trumpcare will undo much of the good done by Obamacare.

Since Obamacare was implemented, 20 million people who weren’t covered by health insurance are now covered. For many of these people, access to health insurance was made possible by subsidies provided through Obamacare.

Trumpcare eliminates those subsidies.

Since Obamacare was implemented, the percentage of people with health care insurance decreased from 18 percent to 8.6 percent.

One of the reasons for this steep decline is the fact that Obamacare made Medicaid available to more low-income workers.

Trumpcare reduces Medicaid funding and ends its status as an entitlement program, meaning that many low-income workers who qualify for Medicaid under Obamacare will no longer be able to enroll in Medicaid.

Since Obamacare was implemented, workers with pre-existing health conditions have been able to get health insurance. Prior to Obamacare, insurance companies routinely denied health insurance coverage to people with pre-existing health conditions, but Obamacare banned this practice.

Trumpcare eliminates the pre-existing condition ban.

In place of the pre-existing conditions ban, Trumpcare would help states fund high-risk health insurance pools for people with pre-existing health conditions.

But high-risk pools have been tried in the past and failed to adequately insure people with pre-existing conditions. “States that ran high-risk pools prior to the ACA found it virtually impossible to actually finance them sustainably while covering significant numbers of people,” reports Thomas Huelskoetter of Think Progress.

As part of its efforts to inform the public about Trumpcare’s shortcomings, UNITE HERE called out members of Congress who want to repeal Obamacare and replace it with Trumpcare.

“Members of Congress like Ann Wagner, Steve Knight, Darrell Issa, Barbara Comstock and Luke Messer and all the rest get first-class health care thanks to US taxpayers, and they get it for life,” said Casey. “Yet they have the audacity to consider asking those same taxpayers to pay more in taxes in order to settle for second-class health care. We will fight them in Congress and see them at the ballot box.”

Santander Bank employees demand right to join a union

Santander Bank employees on February 21 rallied in Boston and Dallas for the right to join a union.

Santander Bank is an international banking corporation headquartered in Spain. In the US, its bank branches are located mainly in the Northeast. It also owns a subprime consumer loan company called Santander Consumer USA that operates out of Dallas.

In 2016, Santander Bank’s holding company reported profits of $5.9 billion.

Santander bank employees were joined at the rally by consumer rights advocates. They all belong to the Committee for Better Banks (CBB), a coalition of bank employees and consumer advocates working together to improve conditions in the banking industry for both employees and customers. CBB is affiliated with the Communication Workers of America.

At the February 21 rallies, bank employees and consumer advocates, delivered letter to Santander executives demanding that they respect their employees right join a union.

One of the reasons that bank employees say they need a union is that banks like Santander often pit the interests of employees against the interest of customers.

“Our neighbors and communities trust us to help them–whether it’s with a loan or saving for their kid’s college tuition–but Santander executives choose to put us in an impossible position between providing for our families and doing what’s best for our customers,” said Peggy Spencer, a Santander Consumer worker in Dallas. ” Today, we’re taking our first major step to winning a voice on the job, improving working conditions, and putting an end to discriminatory, deceptive practices that are holding back thousands of families.”

Like other large banks, Santander has been accused of predatory practices that hurt customers.

In July, Santander paid a $10 million fine after the US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) charged it with deceptive trade practices. According to CFPB, Santander customers were given false information about the high cost of the bank’s overdraft protection service. In some cases, customers were enrolled in overdraft protection without their consent.

In 2015, Santander Consumer paid $9.5 million to settle a US Justice Department suit. The suit charged Santander with violating the Service Members Civil Relief Act, which protects service members on active duty from unlawful repossession of their vehicles.

According to the Justice Department, its “lawsuit alleges that Santander initiated and completed 760 repossessions, without court orders, of motor vehicles owned by . . . protected service members.  . . .  By failing to obtain court orders before repossessing motor vehicles owned by protected service members, Santander prevented service members from obtaining a court’s review of whether their repossessions should be delayed or adjusted in light of their military service.”

The settlement requires Santander to pay each service member affected $5000 and help them repair their credit rating.

More recently, a report by CBB finds that Santander’s lending practices are discriminatory.

An “analysis of the bank’s Home Mortgage Lending Act data reported each year to federal regulators reveals a disturbing pattern of racial and economic discrimination in Santander’s home mortgage lending,” reads the report entitled “Denied: An Assessment of Racial and Economic Disparities in Santander Bank’s Mortgage Lending.”

“In 2014, Santander denied more than 26 percent of borrowers of color a mortgage loan, compared to an aggregate 17 percent denial rate by other banks in the same (market areas),” continues the report.

In addition to wanting to help end Santander’s customer service problems, the bank’s employees have their own collective grievances, which are shared by employees of other large banks.

The median average pay for bank tellers is a little more than $26,400 a year. Pay among tellers is so low, reports CBB, that one-third of tellers nationwide qualify for some sort of public assistance, such as food stamps or Medicaid.

Higher level employees have their own salary-related grievances. Their salaries are often determined by whether they meet unrealistically high sales quotas, putting pressure on them to sell unwanted and sometimes expensive services to their customers.

To address these grievances, bank workers need a union, say union supporters, and they want Santander to extend to them the same rights that Santander employees in other countries enjoy.

Santander operates throughout Europe and South America, and 150,000 of the bank’s employees on these two continents are union members.

“In Brazil, workers are partnering with management to promote customer service and ethical sales and to prevent predatory practices that force workers to push unnecessary products on their customers,” reads a statement by CBB. “In Europe, Santander jobs are stable, middle-class jobs that allow workers to care for their families.”

Santander employees in the US want the same things.

Government seeks an end to miners strike in Chile

As a strike by 2500 miners at the Escondida copper mine in Chile begins its second week, the government has invited representatives of the workers’ union and the mine’s owner to Santiago, the country’s capital, for mediated negotiations.

Escondida, owned by BHP Billiton, an Australian mining conglomerate, is the world’s largest copper mine.

The strike began after BHP and the workers’ union Sindicato No. 1 Trabajadores de Minera Escondida (Workers Number One Union of the Escondida Mines) could not reach an agreement on wages and bonuses.

BHP also wants to create a two-tier benefits plan that would lower benefits, such as aid for education and health care, for newly hired workers. The union strongly opposes such a plan.

To union members, this strike is crucial.

“We will be on strike for as long as it takes, until death (if necessary),” said Karen Vargas, a striking miner to Agence France Presse at the union’s strike camp near the mine. “We have to win back all that we had.”

The workers’ union has accused BHP of gaming Chile’s new labor law in order to lower future benefits.

The new law, which goes into effect in April, aims to give unions a bit more leverage in collective bargaining negotiations.

One of the new law’s provisions establishes a minimum-floor rule which means that the benefits in place at the time that contract negotiations begin are the starting point for bargaining. Companies can’t begin negotiations by demanding benefit cuts.

The union accuses the company of trying undercut the minimum-floor rule by establishing two tiers of benefits, whose lower benefits will become the floor for future contract negotiations.

“It’s very probable that the company intends to lower benefits (for new workers) so that the next negotiation starts with what that established,” union spokesman Carlos Allendes said to Reuters. “(For us) that’s the last straw, the last thrashes of a drowning man.”

In addition to setting a minimum-floor for contract negotiations, Chile’s new labor law among other things:

  • allows sector wide bargaining, meaning that unions representing workers in the same business sector can negotiate a sector-wide contract, which prevents competing companies from undercutting labor costs to gain a competitive advantage;
  • allows temporary and contract workers to join a union
  • prohibits the use of replacement workers during a strike; and
  • requires companies to provide unions with relevant financial information when requested.

A provision in the law that workers must be union members to receive wages and benefits negotiated by the union was struck down by Chile’s Constitutional Court.

The government enacted labor law reforms in hopes that a more fair bargaining relationship between workers and owners will allow workers to share more of the wealth that they help create.

After Chile’s military dictator Augusto Pinochet seized power in a  bloody 1973 coup, he imposed free market policies that among other things severely restricted workers’ ability to bargain collectively.

Because of this and other advantages that Pinochet’s free market policies gave to businesses, most of the wealth generated in the country has been pocketed by the extremely wealthy.

As a result, Chile has the highest rate of inequality of all 30 plus nations that belong to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

OECD uses an index called the Gini coefficient to measure the distribution of a country’s wealth. On the Gini index, zero represents a completely equal distribution of wealth, and 1 represents the concentration of all wealth in one person.

According to a 2016 OECD report, Chile’s Gini coefficient is 0.47, the highest among all OECD nations (Mexico is second with a Gini of 0.46 and the US is third with a Gini of 0.39.)

The OECD’s average Gini is 0.30.

 

The sea of inequality that separates the very wealthy from those who create the wealth has created turmoil the country.

In the last year, pensioners have been in the streets demanding pension reform, students have been in the streets demanding education reform, and airline workers, airport workers, public employees, other miners, food processing workers and others have gone on strike.

The strike by Escondida workers is the latest manifestation of this turmoil.

The union is hoping that the strike can be resolved through government mediation, and the government would like to see the strike resolved because copper production is a vital part of the country’s economy.

But BHP appears to be stonewalling, at least that is what Joaquin Garcia-Huidobro, a columnist for El Mecurio, a daily newspaper, seems to think.

BHP “seems to have nothing to say to Chileans” about how it intends to end the strike, writes Garcia-Huidobro.

“The silence of this Anglo-Australian company. . .  is eloquent,” continues Garcia-Huidobro. “It is an example of a style that has caused great damage.”

Momentive workers vote for agreement that ends their strike

After being on strike for 105 days, Momentive workers in Waterford, New York on February 14 voted to accept a new collective bargaining agreement.

Members of IUE-CWA Local 81539, which represents production workers at the chemical plant that makes silicon products, voted 317 to 211 to ratify the new agreement; members of its sister local 81380, which represents lab workers, voted 61 to 0 to ratify.

Dennis Trainor, vice president of District 1 of the Communication Workers of America who helped negotiate the agreement, said that the new contract was a “substantial  improvement” over the company’s take-it-or-leave-it original offer that caused the strike.

Nevertheless, workers at the union office for the contract vote were in a somber mood.

The new contract provides two raises–a 2 percent raise effective in June and another 2 percent raise effective a year later–, a $2000 signing bonus, reduced health care benefits, fewer vacation days, and it eliminates retiree health care insurance for workers who retire this year and onward.

The agreement that ended the strike leaves intact the firings of 27 union members for strike-related activities.

Members of locals 81359 and 81380 went on strike when Momentive, owned by one of the world’s largest private equity companies Apollo Global Management, offered the workers a new collective bargaining agreement with a laundry list of concessions, givebacks, and takeaways.

Since Apollo bought Momentive in 2006, workers have endured a series of pay cuts and benefit reductions.

When Apollo made its latest concession laden contract offer, it left workers with no choice but to vote to authorize and carry out a strike.

During the strike, Apollo brought in replacement workers to maintain some semblance of productive activity.

During the strike, Momentive was cited by New York’s environmental protection agency for health and safety violations that endangered the surrounding communities. The union attributed the health and safety problems to errors caused by the replacement workers.

The sight of these replacement workers undermining the workers’ fight to maintain their benefits and decent standard of living and the threats to the health safety of their neighbors, families, and friends caused by the inexperienced replacement workers did not sit well with strikers.

Some workers were justifiably enraged by the replacement workers’ actions.

When they expressed their anger at the company and at the replacement workers themselves, the company fired them.

When the workers return to work on Friday, those fired during the strike will still be out of a job.

The new agreement establishes an arbitration process that allows for a review of the terminations and possible reinstatement of those who were fired.

Fifteen of those fired, were accused of vandalism. They will have their firings reviewed by an independent arbitrator appointed by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who mediated the end of the strike.

Returning workers were also miffed by the fact that some replacement workers will remain on the job during a transition period and by the company’s requirement that striking workers attend a two-day training workshop on the company’s code of conduct and safety.

Many of the strikers are long-time Momentive employees with years of experience handling the plant’s dangerous chemicals and operating the plant’s equipment They are more than capable of leading the safety classes that they will be attending.

During the strike, some workers who voted for President Trump hoped that he would intervene to help end the strike.

But those hopes faded when they learned that one of Trump’s new economic advisers would be Steve Schwarzman, CEO of the Blackstone Group, another one of the world’s largest private equity companies that until last summer owned a stake in Momentive. Schwarzman is the new chairman of the President’s Strategic and Policy Forum.

AT&T workers demonstrate solidarity to oppose company greed

Three groups of AT&T union workers joined together on February 11 to denounce AT&T’s greed, express their frustration with AT&T’s lack of concern about its workers, and to demand a fair contract.

AT&T  Mobility Orange Contract workers in 35 states, AT&T wireline workers in California and Nevada, and AT&T DirecTV workers rallied for fair contracts at AT&T wireless retail stores and call centers in 36 cities throughout the US. They are members of the Communication Workers of America (CWA).

The three groups are involved in three separate collective bargaining negotiations, and union members are frustrated with the company’s lack of respect for its frontline workers.

“AT&T is underestimating the deep frustration wireless retail, call center, and field workers are feeling right now with its decisions to squeeze workers and customers, especially as the company just reported more than $13 billion in annual profits,” said Dennis Trainor, vice president of CWA District 1. “Nationwide, AT&T workers’ resolve to win has never been stronger, and when telecom workers commit to winning a fair contract, they don’t back down.”

AT&T Mobility Orange Contract wireless technicians, customer service representative, and retail store employees began negotiating in January.

The union says that the company during negotiations has failed to address key concerns of its workers. Subsequently, 93 percent of the union members voted last week to authorize a strike.

“Americans are fed up with giant corporations like AT&T that make record profits but ask workers to do more with less and choose to offshore and outsource jobs,” said Nicole Popis, an AT&T wireless call center worker from Illinois.  “I’ve watched our staff shrink from 200 employees down to 130. I’m a single mother and my son’s about to graduate. I voted yes to authorize a strike because I’m willing to do whatever it takes to show AT&T we’re serious–the company must address these issues and bargain a fair contract.”

Since 2011, AT&T has cut 8,000 call center jobs and moved these jobs to other countries. At 60 percent of its retail stores, the company has outsourced good paying union jobs to private contractors who pay lower wages and provide fewer benefits.

The company is also seeking to increase health insurance premiums for long-term employees and to deny pension benefits for new hires.

Retail store workers want the company to increase their commissions, and all wireless workers want a fair wage increase that recognizes the vital role they play in making the company’s robust profits possible.

Orange Contract Mobility workers were poised to go on strike when their current collective bargaining agreement expired on February 11, but  on the eve of the strike deadline, the two sides agreed to continue bargaining.

While the bargaining continues, the existing collective bargaining agreement remains in effect. The union can still strike after it gives the company a notice of its intention to strike 72 hours before the strike begins.

“The union and company remain very far apart on all issues important to our members,”reads a message from the union’s Bargaining Team to union members. “The Bargaining Team is not here to settle, we are here to fight, and we feel energized by all the mobilization we see across the Orange Contract footprint. AT&T is greedy and their proposals are unfair and appalling.”

AT&T wireline workers in California and Nevada who maintain and repair telecommunications infrastructure and install and repair telecommunications equipment in homes have been negotiating a new collective bargaining agreement since April.

In addition to being frustrated with AT&T’s lack of responsiveness at the bargaining table, union workers are concerned that AT&T isn’t investing enough in its telecommunications infrastructure.

The consequences of this lack of investment were exposed in January when severe storms hit the West Coast.

According to the union, storm related outages increased by 350 percent during the January storms because the company’s telecommunications  infrastructure was too old. Workers are concerned that outages will be even worse when the next storm hits.

In addition to not investing in infrastructure, union members charge the company with not investing in its workers.

Union members are seeking improvements to their health care benefit, a benefit that was shaped in 2009 while the company was feeling the after shock of the Great Recession. As a result, worker health care costs have increased substantially. For some members, increased health care costs have resulted in stagnant or lower take home pay.

Wireline workers also want a decent pay increase. The union reports that during the last five years, company productivity increased 25 percent, but pay increased only 17 percent.

“The company’s priorities are backwards . . . because the frontline, which is the employees in the call centers, the technicians in the manholes, (and) in the houses, are the ones (who the company) gets (its) profits from,” said Armando Zepeda, an AT&T Premises Technician.

Last year, 95 percent of AT&T’s California and Nevada wireline workers authorized a strike, but the union and company have continued to negotiate.

Like their wireless counterparts, wireline workers could go on strike after giving the company a 72-hour notice.

If both groups go on strike at the same time, AT&T could be facing a strike by 38,000 of its workers.

AT&T DirectTV workers in CWA District 9 are also negotiating a collective bargaining agreement.

They joined CWA last year, and this will be their first contract. Bargaining began on February 8.

In September, CWA reached an agreement on a first contract for 2100 DirectTV workers in the Southeast and Midwest.

That contract provides for the same wage progression schedules in contracts covering CWA members at AT&T in those regions.  Those DirecTV workers also will receive wage increases every six month until they achieve the top of the wage progression scale.

The tentative agreement also provides for health care coverage; disability, savings and pension benefits, a grievance and arbitration process, and coverage under the national transfer plan, among other benefits.

Union joins consumer and environmental groups in suit to stop”one in, two out” executive order

The Communication Workers of America (CWA) joined Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group, and the Natural Resources Defense Council in suing the Trump administration to block implementation of a recent executive order requiring federal agencies to eliminate two existing regulations for every new one that they issue.

The plaintiffs are concerned that the executive order will diminish protections against discrimination, public health, worker safety, consumer protection, and the quality of the environment.

CWA President Chris Shelton said that Trump’s so-called “one in, two out” Executive Order imperils worker safety by requiring the elimination of existing job safety regulations when the need arises to write new ones.

“This order means that the asbestos workplace standard, for example, could be discarded in order to adopt safeguards for nurses from infectious diseases in their workplaces,” said Shelton. “This violates the mission of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to protect workers’ safety and health. It also violates common sense.”

While President Trump touted his executive order as a boon to small business, the bulk of the order’s benefits will go to large corporations.

Public Citizen President Robert Weissman blasted Trump’s order as a gift to big business at the expense of workers, public health, consumers, and the environment.

“No one thinking sensibly about how to set rules for health, safety, the environment, and the economy would ever adopt the Trump Executive Order approach–unless their only goal was to confer enormous benefits on big business,” said Weissman. “If implemented, the order would result in lasting damage to our government’s ability to save lives, protect our environment, police Wall Street, keep consumers safe, and fight discrimination.”

Weissman also criticized Trump’s Executive Order for establishing a new regulatory budgeting system that requires the net cost of new regulations to be zero, meaning that agencies must offset the cost of the new regulations by cutting existing regulations.

“By irrationally directing agencies to consider costs but not benefits of new rules, it would fundamentally change our government’s role from one of protecting the public to protecting corporate profits,” Weissman said.

The public benefits of regulations are often ignored, but according to the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the public benefits of regulations often far exceeded their costs.

OMB has developed a methodology for estimating the costs and benefits of regulations and reports this information to Congress.

Project on Government Oversights reports that the draft of OMB’s most recent report estimates that the annual public benefit of all major regulations over the last ten years amounts to between $208 billion and $627 billion; on the other hand, the cost of these regulations ranges from $57 billion to $85 billion.

In 2005 when the OMB was headed by a Republican appointee of President George W. Bush, its cost-benefit analysis of regulations  found that the annual benefits over a ten-year period amounted to between $69.6 billion and $276.8 billion while the costs ranged from $34.8 billion to $39.4 billion.

In addition to ignoring the public benefits of regulations, the Trump Executive Order forces agencies to make what Rhea Suh, president of the National Resources Defense Council, calls the “false choice” of determining what public benefits must be sacrificed in order to write a new regulations.

 

“President Trump’s order would deny Americans the basic protections they rightly expect,” said Suh. “New efforts to stop pollution don’t automatically make old ones unnecessary.”

The plaintiffs’ suit if successful will prevent agencies from being forced to make these kinds of false choices.

The lawsuit was filed on February 8 in the US District Court for the District of Columbia. According to a statement issued by the plaintiffs, “the complaint alleges that . . . agencies cannot lawfully comply with the president’s order because doing so would violate the statutes under which the agencies operate and the Administrative Procedure Act.”

“When presidents overreach, it is up to the courts to remind them no one is above the law and hold them to the US Constitution,” said Patti Goldman, an Earthjustice attorney and one of the attorneys working for the plaintiffs. “This is one of those times.”