Skip to Content

Court Enjoins FTC Noncompete Ban: Appeal Likely

A federal judge in Texas has enjoined the Federal Trade Commission’s ban on noncompete agreements, leaving the FTC’s attempt to quash such agreements waiving in the breeze, at least for the time being.

Earlier this spring, the FTC issued a broad rule banning almost all noncompetes in for-profit businesses, subject to limited exceptions, including an exception for senior executives (defined as workers earning more than $151,164 annually who are in policymaking roles). More detail about the rule is available in our client alert, “Court Direction on FTC’s Noncompete Ban Expected This Summer.”

The FTC’s rule was promptly challenged by numerous businesses seeking to enjoin it.

Courts issued conflicting decisions earlier this summer. In early July, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas enjoined the FTC’s rule and stayed its effective date but applied its ruling only to the parties in the case and declined to issue a nationwide injunction. In late July, however, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania declined to enjoin or stay the FTC’s rule. In August, the Northern District of Texas enjoined the FTC’s rule and stayed its effect nationwide, holding that the FTC lacked statutory authority to promulgate the rule and that it violated the Administrative Procedure Act in doing so.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision overruling the long-standing Chevron deference doctrine is a wind at the back of those challenging the FTC rule, and for now businesses can breathe a sigh of relief. But employers that may be affected by the FTC noncompete rule would be well advised to be prepared to comply with the FTC rule in case compliance is needed in short order following an appeal.

©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.