October Term 2022 · Docket 21-1454

Do state National Guard technicians count as federal employees for labor law purposes?

The Ohio Adjutant General's Department argues it is not a federal agency. The Federal Labor Relations Authority says it is.

Official caption
OH Adjutant Gen.'s Dept. v. FLRA
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Decided
Sources analyzed through
Post Opinion

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  3. — An official Court opinion was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Flowers argued the Sixth Circuit erred. He stated the Reform Act defines agencies specifically. He listed executive departments and government corporations.

    Ms. Reaves argued the sides that brought the case act in a federal civilian role. She stated they are not acting in a federal military role. She emphasized their role in the federal employment system.

    Mr. Grajales argued a ruling for the union is unique. He stated it will not affect other state entities. He described the scheme as unique for the National Guard.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The dispute centers on whether state National Guard technicians are federal employees. The Ohio Adjutant General's Department claims it is not a federal agency. The Federal Labor Relations Authority asserts it is.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 9, 2023.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The Ohio Adjutant General's Department wants the Court to reverse the lower court orders. It seeks to avoid federal labor law obligations.

The Federal Labor Relations Authority wants the Court to affirm the lower court orders. It seeks to enforce federal labor law compliance.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The Ohio Adjutant General's Department argues the Reform Act defines agencies narrowly. It claims state guards are not federal agencies when employing technicians.

The Federal Labor Relations Authority argues the sides that brought the case act in a federal civilian role. It claims they must comply with federal labor orders.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Kagan asked what collective bargaining rights mean for these employees. She questioned who sits across the table to bargain.

Justice Thomas asked when a technician is a federal employee. He asked for the specific purposes of that status.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the scope of federal labor law. It determines whether state National Guard technicians have federal bargaining rights. It clarifies the legal status of dual-status employees.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Verified official opinions and orders

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON