A federal judge has temporarily blocked a Biden-Harris administration rule that would have extended collective bargaining rights to foreign workers under the H-2A visa program, rights not provided to American workers in the same industry, Breitbart reported.

The preliminary injunction was issued following a legal challenge led by Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, along with attorneys general from 16 other states, arguing that the rule oversteps legal boundaries.

Legal Challenge Against New Labor Rule

In September 2023, the U.S. Department of Labor proposed a new rule intended to modify the H-2A visa program, which historically allows foreign workers to be employed in American agricultural jobs. The rule, finalized in April 2024, would grant collective bargaining rights specifically to foreign workers under the H-2A visa program, a right not afforded to American farm workers. This development triggered immediate legal opposition.

In June 2024, Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach spearheaded a lawsuit to prevent the enforcement of the new rule. The lawsuit, titled Kansas v. U.S. Department of Labor, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia. Kobach was joined by attorneys general from 16 other states, including Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, and Texas.

Judge Issues Preliminary Injunction

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Lisa Godbey Wood issued a preliminary injunction to halt the enforcement of the rule across the 17 states involved in the lawsuit. In her ruling, Judge Wood questioned the legitimacy of the new rule, stating that it creates rights not previously established by Congress.

“The issue before the Court is whether the Final Rule creates a right not previously bestowed by Congress. The Court finds it does so,” Judge Wood noted. She further explained that, “Regardless of the terminology used in the Final Rule … the Final Rule provides for agricultural workers’ right to participate in concerted activity to further their interests. That is a right that Congress has not created by statute. And Defendants have not provided any source indicating that Congress intended to create such a right.”

States Argue Rule Overreaches Legal Boundaries

The lawsuit led by Kobach and supported by 16 other attorneys general argued that the rule unfairly grants foreign H-2A workers rights that are not available to American farm workers. Kobach, expressing his opposition to the rule, stated, “The Biden-Harris administration has taken an America Last position.” He added, “In this case, they were trying to give alien ag workers rights that Americans do not have. That’s why Kansas took the lead in filing this lawsuit. The rule of law has prevailed.”

The court’s decision to issue a preliminary injunction was influenced by the argument that the rule grants rights not provided for by Congress. The injunction not only halts the enforcement of the rule in the 17 states but also applies to specific agricultural entities, such as Miles Berry Farm and the Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association, which were included in the injunction.

Background on the H-2A Visa Program

The H-2A visa program allows U.S. employers to bring foreign nationals to fill temporary agricultural jobs, addressing labor shortages. Since 1997, the number of H-2A workers has surged from about 16,000 to nearly 300,000 in Fiscal Year 2022.

This increase has fueled debates over labor rights and immigration policy. While the Department of Labor's new rule aims to improve conditions for foreign workers, opponents argue it could create a troubling precedent by granting rights to foreign workers that American workers do not receive.

Legal Battle to Continue

The preliminary injunction temporarily blocks the rule while the lawsuit proceeds. The 17 states argue that the rule oversteps executive authority, while the Biden-Harris administration will likely defend it by emphasizing worker rights, including those of H-2A visa holders. The administration faces challenges over claims that the rule creates new rights not authorized by Congress.

Implications for American and Foreign Workers

The outcome of this legal challenge could significantly impact both American and foreign agricultural workers. If upheld, the rule might expand labor rights for foreign workers; if struck down, it could reinforce existing disparities between American workers and foreign nationals on visa programs.

The case highlights broader debates about labor rights, immigration policy, and the balance of power between the executive branch and Congress. Judge Wood's preliminary injunction indicates the courts are prepared to closely scrutinize the administration's actions.

Future of Labor Rights in Agriculture

The dispute highlights tensions in the agricultural sector, where labor shortages and dependence on foreign workers are growing. The legal challenge reflects broader concerns about fairness and labor rights.

Blocking the rule, at least temporarily, emphasizes the contentious nature of the policy change and the strong opposition from multiple states. This legal battle could influence the future of labor rights and immigration policy in the U.S., especially in agriculture.

For now, the preliminary injunction remains in effect, and the rule will not apply in the 17 states involved. The ongoing case will continue to impact American and foreign agricultural workers.