MARYLAND — The American Federation for Government Employees and the National Federation of Federal Employees filed a lawsuit against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in the U.S. District Court for Maryland on July 9, 2026. The lawsuit challenges Hegseth's order to terminate collective bargaining agreements with 24 hours' notice, alleging a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

The lawsuit states Hegseth exceeded his statutory authority in implementing President Trump's executive order regarding collective bargaining. President Trump signed an executive order in March 2025 that cited a provision of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act, restricting collective bargaining rights for parts of the federal workforce based on national-security grounds.

According to the lawsuit, the Department of Defense (DOD) did not have a uniform process for implementing the termination of collective bargaining agreements (CBAs). The filing states that in many cases, there was minimal or no notification or communication about actions being taken. "Some local union leaders were informed by phone that their unions' CBAs were being terminated; others were informed by email, or by letter; others received no communications at all—their agency counterparts just went 'radio silent,' or started refusing to answer routine questions."

The lawsuit details confusion and misinformation across facilities nationwide following Hegseth's memorandum. It states: "Beyond these 'official' notifications (or lack thereof), Secretary Hegseth's memorandum begat a firestorm of confusion and misinformation at facilities nationwide—about who still did or did not have collective bargaining agreements, and why, and since when." The filing notes that "[f]or nearly a year after the issuance of EO 14251, DOD continued its longstanding policy of honoring the CBAs into which it has entered." The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) had changed its guidance in August 2025 to suggest agencies could choose to terminate CBAs, and then in February 2026, recommended that agencies should terminate them.

Additionally, the lawsuit alleges the DOD failed to prepare a list of subdivisions not covered by the executive order, such as those employing police officers, firefighters, or security guards, before Hegseth's memorandum was issued. It states: "Yet DOD failed to prepare any list of subdivisions that are not covered by the EO because they employ police officers, firefighters or security guards before issuance of the Hegseth memorandum, nor did the Hegseth memorandum provide for such a list to be created before implementation of the memorandum." Consequently, "[t]hus, across DOD, subdivisions have declared that employees who work alongside police officers, firefighters and security guards—workers in the same 'local employing office' within the meaning of the EO—no longer have the protections of their CBAs or any rights under the [federal labor statute], in direct contradiction of the EO."

The lawsuit concludes that the DOD's April 9, 2026, decision to terminate CBAs within 24 hours "irrationally and improperly failed to explain why the DOD would no longer honor existing CBAs, or why termination was necessary within 24 hours notwithstanding the agency's prior honoring of CBAs and the predictable chaos that would result from DOD's abrupt reversal." This legal action could determine the scope of authority held by the Secretary of Defense in implementing executive orders related to federal labor relations and whether such actions comply with established administrative procedures.