Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupport
Contact Us
Search
Close

Supreme Court Won’t Consider Federal Contractor Minimum Wage Mandate

By Justin R. Barnes & Laura A. Mitchell on January 14, 2025
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The Supreme Court on Monday, Jan. 13, 2025, declined to take up a decision addressing the president’s authority under the Procurement Act to issue a minimum wage mandate for employees working on federal government contracts. The denial of the petition for certiorari keeps a circuit split intact, and leaves federal contractors to navigate the wage mandate’s uncertain legal status while complying with the latest minimum wage hike to $17.75 per hour, which took effect Jan. 1.

President Biden issued Executive Order (EO) 14026 in 2021, which increased from $10.95 to $15 the minimum hourly wage for employees working on federal government contracts, and provided for annual increases to the minimum wage. In 2022, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued regulations implementing the EO.

In the case rejected by the Supreme Court, a Colorado federal court refused to grant a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the wage mandate. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed. Bradford v. United States DOL, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 10382 (D. Colo. Apr. 30, 2024). The appeals court held the plaintiffs were not likely to show that the DOL lacked statutory authority to issue the DOL rule implementing EO 14026. The appeals court did not issue a final decision on the merits, however. The plaintiffs’ petition for certiorari asked the justices to address whether the wage mandate exceeds the president’s authority under the Procurement Act and, if not, whether the statute improperly gives lawmaking authority to the president. Their petition was denied, leaving these critical questions unresolved.

Meanwhile, two other challenges to the federal contractor wage mandate are pending.

In November, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the president lacked authority under the Procurement Act to issue EO 14026. State of Nebraska v. Su, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 28010 (9th Cir Nov. 5, 2024). The appeals court also held the DOL regulation implementing the EO was arbitrary and capricious because the DOL failed to consider alternatives to the $15 rate, such as a lower wage rate or phasing in the $15 rate over several years.

Again, however, the Ninth Circuit also did not address the merits. Instead of invalidating EO 14026 and the implementing regulation, the Ninth Circuit sent the case back to the federal district court in Arizona, which had upheld the wage mandate in a legal challenge brought by several states. On remand, the district court is expected to issue a preliminary injunction barring application of the wage mandate, although it is not clear whether the injunction will apply to just the plaintiff states (to the extent of their relationships with the federal government as federal contractors) or as a complete ban to enforcement within the states. On Dec. 20, 2024, the DOL filed a petition for en banc rehearing of the divided Ninth Circuit panel decision.

The wage mandate is also facing an ongoing challenge in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The appeals court will consider the Biden Administration’s appeal of a 2023 decision invalidating EO 14026 in a case brought by the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The Texas district court had narrowly enjoined the wage mandate only as applied to the plaintiff state governments, refusing to issue a nationwide injunction because it did not want to “encroach” upon other federal courts that had upheld the executive order. State of Texas v. Biden, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171265 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 26, 2023). The appeals court heard oral argument last August. The Fifth Circuit could reverse the Texas court and uphold EO 14026, setting up a split with the Ninth Circuit. This outcome is unlikely, however.

For now, the minimum wage mandate is in effect. But a broader reprieve (through a variety of avenues) may be forthcoming. The Trump Administration may opt to abandon the Fifth Circuit appeal and the bid to rehear the Ninth Circuit panel’s holding. President-Elect Trump also may opt to rescind President Biden’s executive order and decline to defend the wage mandate.

Contact your Jackson Lewis attorney if you have questions about the status of the federal contractor minimum wage mandate and its effect on your business.

Photo of Laura A. Mitchell Laura A. Mitchell

Laura Mitchell is a principal in the Denver office of Jackson Lewis P.C. and leads the firm’s Workplace Analytics and Preventive Strategies Pay Equity subgroup. She partners with employers to evaluate, develop and implement policies and practices that ensure workplace fairness while mitigating…

Laura Mitchell is a principal in the Denver office of Jackson Lewis P.C. and leads the firm’s Workplace Analytics and Preventive Strategies Pay Equity subgroup. She partners with employers to evaluate, develop and implement policies and practices that ensure workplace fairness while mitigating legal risk. Laura is a guiding force in the firm’s most specialized and technical practice areas where she leverages an analytics-focused approach to partner with her clients in building legally compliant programs around which they can anchor their workplaces achieving productivity and stability.

Laura understands that creating a competitive advantage for employers in today’s workplace involves using a data-driven approach to counsel companies on the development of proactive and equitable non-discriminatory practices in hiring, promotions, separations and pay—and where advancements in technology can create both opportunities for efficiencies and risk that can be measured. Committed to putting her clients’ organizational goals first and foremost while balancing legal risk, Laura views herself as an extension of her clients’ team, responsible for providing proactive guidance and engaging in transparent, ongoing communication. Staying the course with employers across their organizational journey while balancing legal compliance obligations throughout their employees’ lifecycle ensures Laura’s position as a go-to resource.

Laura works with companies across all industries—both new and well-established multi-national organizations of all sizes—to realize the combined vision of legal compliance, increased productivity and economic growth enhanced by a focus on pay equity.  As part of the pay equity journey, she advises employers on the evolving pay transparency landscape, working to align compliant practices with the practical realities of the business world.

Laura partners closely with government contractors to understand, implement and demonstrate compliance with their EEO regulatory and compliance obligations. She also works closely with non-government contractor clients to conduct risk assessments of their programs, policies, and training to align with federal and state anti-discrimination requirements.

Laura is the editor and a principal contributor of the GovCon Employment Exchange blog and presents on pay equity and government contractor obligations. To round out her days, Laura enjoys spending time with her family and friends attending sports events, working out, riding her bike, playing pickleball and taking in Colorado’s incomparable sunsets.

Read more about Laura A. MitchellEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    Wage & Hour Law Update
  • Organization:
    Jackson Lewis P.C.

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo