A legal battle has erupted between ABM Industry Groups and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), with the janitorial services giant claiming the department’s in-house proceedings for enforcing anti-discrimination rules against federal contractors are unconstitutional. In a lawsuit filed in Houston, ABM argues that the Labor Department’s administrative system infringes on its constitutional right to a jury trial.
The crux of ABM’s complaint lies in the role of administrative judges within the DOL’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP). The company contends that these judges are improperly shielded from presidential oversight, violating constitutional principles. The case challenges a 2021 DOL investigation that accuses ABM of favoring Hispanic job applicants over white and Black candidates — an allegation the company denies.
This lawsuit is part of a broader wave of legal challenges following a June U.S. Supreme Court decision in Jarkesy v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. In that ruling, the Court deemed the SEC’s use of administrative judges to impose civil penalties unconstitutional, as it infringes on the right to a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment. ABM is not alone in this fight; both Comcast and Perdue Farms have similarly filed lawsuits targeting the constitutionality of DOL’s in-house adjudication of whistleblower complaints.
The case marks the third recent lawsuit accusing federal agencies of unconstitutional administrative practices, potentially setting the stage for further legal scrutiny of regulatory powers. ABM seeks to halt the ongoing DOL case and reshape how administrative justice is delivered within federal agencies.
The lawsuit is now pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
