The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss in United States Department of Defense v. AFGE argues that the federal government’s lawsuit—seeking a declaratory judgment to pre-approve termination of collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) based on a new Executive Order—should be dismissed for three key reasons:
1. Lack of Article III Standing
- The government filed the lawsuit before the Executive Order was made public.
- Defendants argue there was no actual legal controversy at the time of filing because the unions hadn’t even seen the order yet.
- The government is seeking “legal certainty,” not resolving a real dispute, which does not meet constitutional requirements for a federal case.
2. Improper Venue
- Many of the defendant unions are located outside of Texas, and some (like AFGE District 10) are not even legal entities that can be sued.
- The lawsuit involves national unions and issues that are not specific to the Western District of Texas.
3. Misuse of the Declaratory Judgment Act
- The government is trying to preemptively block expected union lawsuits, which undermines the purpose of the Declaratory Judgment Act.
- A related lawsuit challenging the same Executive Order was already filed in California (AFGE v. Trump), making this case duplicative and unnecessary.
The motion asks the court to dismiss the case on jurisdictional and discretionary grounds, emphasizing that the federal government cannot use the courts to greenlight policy actions in advance, especially before affected parties even know what those actions are.