U.S. Supreme Court Labor Case Preview: What Employers Need to Watch in 2025

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear several high-profile labor-related cases that could reshape employer obligations and redefine the authority of federal agencies. These decisions will have far-reaching implications for HR compliance and business operations. Below, ILS Managing Partner Richard Liu and Attorney Ran Shu outline the core risks and strategies employers should consider.

If you or your business operate in California, New York, or other states and need legal support for employment contract compliance or workforce risk management, please contact the ILS legal team at contact@consultils.com. We deliver strategic, efficient solutions to help you navigate policy changes and manage labor risks with confidence.

Case 1: Trump v. Slaughter

This is the most consequential case for employers this term. At its core, the case challenges whether the President can expand their authority to remove leadership from independent regulatory agencies like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Oral arguments are scheduled for December 2025.

Richard Liu, Esq.’s Insight

If agency leaders can be replaced at any time, regulatory priorities will shift frequently, requiring employers to update policies, training, and internal procedures more often. This raises compliance costs, as companies may need repeated revisions to contracts, pay policies, and handbooks, and closer coordination with HR and legal teams to avoid falling behind. At the same time, the FTC is expanding its oversight of non-competes, wage practices, contractor classification, and AI-related privacy, increasing the risk of investigations. Its heightened scrutiny of AI hiring and HR tools also means employers must strengthen privacy and compliance reviews. With different administrations often taking opposite enforcement approaches, long-term workforce and budget planning becomes harder and more uncertain.

These regulatory shifts reflect broader changes in U.S. politics. It is unprecedented for a former president to sue the federal government, yet Trump is doing so, raising significant constitutional questions. How the Supreme Court resolves these cases will influence the limits of presidential power and the relationship between the president and federal agencies.

Trump’s litigation strategy also tests the boundaries of presidential authority, signaling potential long-term changes in the nation’s political and regulatory landscape. For employers, this political uncertainty ultimately translates into greater complexity in compliance planning and long-term decision-making.

Susan Shu, Esq.’s Insight

If the Court ultimately rules that the President or executive branch has broader authority to remove agency leaders at will, the independence of regulatory agencies may be significantly diminished. Enforcement priorities could shift rapidly with each change in administration.

In addition, faster turnover among agency heads would likely lead to more frequent policy changes. As a result, corporate HR and legal teams should enhance their internal monitoring systems—tracking who leads key agencies, their enforcement preferences, and any shifts in regulatory focus. This will enable timely updates to employment contracts, handbooks, algorithm governance policies, and worker classification frameworks. In short, both the cost and complexity of compliance are likely to increase.

Case 2: M & K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund

This case concerns the calculation of “withdrawal liability” under multi-employer pension plans governed by ERISA. The Supreme Court will decide whether current formulas for determining employer exit costs are flawed or overly burdensome.

Richard Liu, Esq.’s Insight

If the court ultimately adopts the employers’ position, companies could face lower withdrawal liability when exiting multiemployer pension plans, significantly reducing their financial burden. A ruling that overturns the current calculation method would also give employers greater flexibility in deciding whether to remain in these plans, helping them control costs and adjust organizational strategy. However, until a final decision is issued, participating employers should stay cautious in budgeting and financial planning, as potential changes to the calculation method may create short-term uncertainty.

Susan Shu, Esq.’s Insight

If the Supreme Court ultimately rules in favor of the employer, the decision could offer short-term relief for businesses. Under the current system, “withdrawal liability” from multi-employer pension plans is often seen as a major constraint on corporate financial decision-making. If the Court endorses more flexible assumptions and calculation methods, the financial burden of exiting such plans could be significantly reduced. This would not only ease financial pressure but also give employers greater strategic control in restructuring their pension obligations.

That said, until a final ruling is issued, employers remain in a period of regulatory uncertainty. Companies participating in these plans should closely monitor case developments and build flexibility into contract negotiations, retirement benefit structures, and capital planning to guard against potential shifts in liability and compliance requirements.

Case 3: Geo Group, Inc. v. Menocal

This case addresses whether federal contractors can immediately appeal the denial of “derivative sovereign immunity” before a case concludes. The decision will define how early in litigation contractors can challenge court rulings in disputes tied to government work.

Richard Liu, Esq.’s Insight

If the court does not allow interlocutory appeals, employers would have to wait until the entire case concludes before challenging an adverse ruling. This would prolong litigation, increase legal costs, and heighten reputational exposure.

Conversely, if the court permits appeals before a final judgment, especially for employers involved in federal or government contracting, companies could challenge unfavorable decisions earlier and reduce long-running dispute risks. Overall, allowing early appeals would give employers greater control in government-related employment disputes, helping them manage risks sooner and prevent further harm.

Susan Shu, Esq.’s Insight

This ruling could significantly reshape litigation strategy for federal contractors. If early appeals are disallowed, contractors will face longer, more expensive lawsuits. Employers engaged in government contracts should review clauses related to dispute resolution, appeal timing, and liability allocation to preserve flexibility.

Strategic Takeaway for Employers

These cases reflect broader shifts in labor enforcement, constitutional governance, and workforce compliance. If the Supreme Court favors employer flexibility, labor agency power may be curtailed, and cost-saving reforms could take hold. However, outcomes remain uncertain.

ILS recommends that employers:

• Closely monitor policy and leadership changes in agencies like the DOL, NLRB, FTC, and EEOC

• Proactively review contracts, handbooks, and tech policies

• Engage legal counsel early to anticipate compliance risks

• Build flexibility into workforce planning and benefits structures

Recent ILS Wins & Legal Insights

ILS continues to secure results across high-impact employment cases. Recent wins include:

• Richard Liu, Managing Partner of Innovative Legal Services, Secures Victory for its Client Through Swift Action and Innovative Legal Strategy; Click here to read the full case's strategies.

• ILS Secures Multi-Million Settlement for Its International Logistics Client; Click here to read the full case's strategies.

• ILS Successfully Defends Public Company in U.S. Government Investigation, Securing Complete Relief from Heavy Fines; Click here to read the full case's strategies.

• ILS Resolves Restaurant Industry Dispute, Avoids Major Liability; Click here to read the full case's strategies.

Through strategic litigation and compliance planning, ILS helps employers turn risk into opportunity.

If you or your business operate in California, New York, or other states and need legal support for employment contract compliance or workforce risk management, please contact the ILS legal team at contact@consultils.com. We deliver strategic, efficient solutions to help you navigate policy changes and manage labor risks with confidence.

Disclaimer: The materials provided on this website are for general informational purposes only and do not, and are not intended to, constitute legal advice. You should not act or refrain from acting based on any information provided here. Please consult with your own legal counsel regarding your specific situation and legal questions.

---

As Managing Partner at ILS, Richard Liu ranks among the leading U.S. attorneys in corporate, employment, and regulatory law. He is known for crafting legal strategies aligned with clients’ business objectives and advising Fortune 500 companies, startups, and executives on corporate transactions, financing, privacy, and employment matters across the technology, healthcare, and financial sectors.

Before founding ILS, Richard practiced at top defense firms, where he developed a reputation for anticipating risks and designing strategies that balance protection with growth. He has secured favorable outcomes in contract and intellectual property disputes, represented clients in state and federal courts, and is recognized for combining large-firm expertise with boutique-firm agility. Richard is also a frequent speaker at industry and legal conferences.

Email: contact@consultils.com | Phone: 626-344-8949

Susan is specialized in employment law and compliance, with additional experience in cross-border investments. With years of experience advising multinational clients, Susan focuses on employment-related matters, including workforce structuring, employee transfers, terminations, compensation and benefits, and workplace policies. She has extensive experience assisting companies in navigating complex labor regulations, managing cross-border employment issues, and resolving workplace disputes.

In addition to her employment law practice, Susan advises on M&A, private equity, venture capital, and cross-border investments. She has assisted international investors with complex deal structures, including VIE frameworks, and prepared due diligence reports and transaction documents.

Email:  contact@consultils.com | Phone: 626-344-8949