Skip to content

Menu

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

Federal Court Injunction Bars FTC’s Non-Compete Agreement Ban

By Daniel Schwartz & Keegan Drenosky on August 21, 2024
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

A federal court in Texas yesterday issued a permanent nationwide injunction barring the Federal Trade Commission’s Non-Compete Agreement Ban from going into effect.  As a practical matter, and barring an unlikely reversal from the 5th Circuit, this means the proposed nationwide ban on non-compete agreements is virtually dead for now, though employers will still need to comply with the patchwork on state laws that may (or may not) bar such non-compete agreements. 

As you may recall, in April, the FTC issued a rule (to go into effect next month) that would have banned employers from using most non-compete agreements with their employees.  In addition, the rule would have required employers to send out notices to all employees that had non-compete agreements that their existing non-competes were not going to be enforced.

The decision yesterday – which was expected after a preliminary ruling earlier this summer – effectively puts a stop to the rule.  In doing so, the court ruled that the FTC had exceeded its rule-making authority in establishing the ban.    

For employers, the injunction may turn out to be a mixed blessing.  Some employers may rejoice at the notion that their existing restrictive covenants with employers may continue to be enforced and that the administrative burden of having to comply with the proposed rule will be alleviated for now. Others, however, may lament the fact that they will still have to comply with various state laws – all of which differ in this scope.  The FTC rule would have meant employers could follow (for the most part) a single rule. 

Again, it’s possible that this decision may be challenged further, but given the Supreme Court’s recent ruling limiting the authority of executive agencies to issue such rules, it seems unlikely for now that an appeal would be successful.  

Thus, employers should continue to monitor developments but should stop any plans to implement the FTC’s ban on non-compete agreements.  However, employers should continue to monitor and comply with the various state laws that have been passed in recent years.  It’s quite probable that various state legislatures will pick this back up in their next sessions since the federal rule is dead for now.  This includes states like Connecticut that have considered such measures in the last few sessions.

Photo of Daniel Schwartz Daniel Schwartz

Dan represents employers in various employment law matters such as employment discrimination, restrictive covenants, human resources, retaliation and whistle blowing, and wage and hour issues. He has extensive trial and litigation experience in both federal and state courts in a variety of areas…

Dan represents employers in various employment law matters such as employment discrimination, restrictive covenants, human resources, retaliation and whistle blowing, and wage and hour issues. He has extensive trial and litigation experience in both federal and state courts in a variety of areas, including commercial litigation and trade secret enforcement. Dan is the author of the independent Connecticut Employment Law Blog. The blog discusses new and noteworthy events in labor and employment law on a daily basis.

Read more about Daniel SchwartzEmailDaniel's Linkedin ProfileDaniel's Twitter Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Keegan Drenosky Keegan Drenosky

Keegan Drenosky practices in the area of labor and employment law and business litigation. She has represented employers in cases involving claims of discrimination and retaliation before the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and state and federal…

Keegan Drenosky practices in the area of labor and employment law and business litigation. She has represented employers in cases involving claims of discrimination and retaliation before the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and state and federal Court.

Read more about Keegan DrenoskyEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    Employment Law Letter
  • Organization:
    Shipman & Goodwin LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

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