Three developments reported on September 21, 2026, focus on litigation and pre-enforcement strategy in labor law. The first alters how courts evaluate National Labor Relations Board requests for preliminary relief. The second is a high-stakes civil suit alleging racketeering by a major union. The third limits who can bring early constitutional challenges to state restrictions on mandatory anti-union meetings.
Seventh Circuit raises Section 10(j) bar for NLRB injunctions
Section 10(j) preliminary injunction to reinstate a decertified union. Citing Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, the court described Section 10(j) relief as "extraordinary" and not automatic. The NLRB regional director seeking relief "failed to demonstrate that irreparable harm would result absent an injunction," the court said.
That ruling narrows an older line of cases that allowed an inference of irreparable harm when a union's influence declined after decertification. The Seventh Circuit's approach aligns with the Sixth Circuit in demanding stronger proof on both irreparable harm and likelihood of success on the merits. The Second and Ninth Circuits have taken a more permissive approach, so the new decision widens a circuit split about how to apply Starbucks v. McKinney in Section 10(j) contexts.
California clinics file RICO suit against SEIU-UHW
A group of health clinics and the California Primary Care Association sued Service Employees International Union United Healthcare Workers (SEIU-UHW) and its president in federal court in the Eastern District of California under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The complaint alleges a multiyear racketeering scheme marked by threats, economic pressure, and ballot initiatives to force clinics to give up property rights and adopt policies favorable to union organizing.
SEIU-UHW responded publicly to related criticism over its involvement in state ballot measures, calling some attacks "false and misleading" and characterizing legal actions as attempts to bully union members. The complaint centers on restrictions and political activity tied to Prop. 44 and other local measures concerning nonprofit community health clinics.
Seventh Circuit questions standing in captive-audience challenge
Litigants and the NLRB must provide firmer proof of imminent, irreparable harm to obtain Section 10(j) injunctions in the Seventh Circuit. Labor organizations facing civil suits by employer coalitions or associations should expect aggressive RICO-style claims in contexts involving ballot measures and clinic governance. Pre-enforcement constitutional challenges to labor-related state laws will face close standing scrutiny where formal enforcement actions are absent.