The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a cornerstone of labor law enforcement and adjudication since 1935, faces a pivotal moment that could redefine its structure and function. Recent judicial developments suggest the Supreme Court may soon overturn or significantly modify the landmark decision in *Humphrey’s Executor v. United States* (1935), which has protected the tenure of NLRB members from at-will presidential dismissal.

This potential shift comes in the wake of *Trump v. Wilcox*, wherein the Court stayed a lower court's order to reinstate a member of the NLRB, indicating a reevaluation of the board’s autonomy from executive influence. The Court's decision to intervene reflects a broader reassessment of how agencies like the NLRB wield executive power, a question also at the heart of the *Seila Law, LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau* (2020) and *Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board* (PCAOB) (2009) cases.

Legal experts anticipate that the Supreme Court might limit the impact of its ruling by separating the NLRB’s adjudicatory functions from its regulatory and enforcement roles. Currently, these powers are delegated primarily to the agency’s General Counsel, who is subject to presidential removal at will.

Given the likelihood of a significant restructuring, proposals have been put forward advocating for the NLRB's transformation into a purely adjudicatory body, termed a "Labor Court." This new entity would consist of a six-member panel appointed by the President with the Senate’s consent for six-year staggered terms. The structure is designed to ensure balanced representation and reduce policy fluctuations that have historically undermined the agency’s stability and credibility.

The proposed Labor Court would handle appeals from administrative law judges on unfair practice cases and from Regional Director orders on representation cases, with no authority to initiate court actions. The General Counsel, removable at will by the President, would retain the power to seek injunctive relief after expedited hearings, enhancing the credibility and fairness of these proceedings.

This restructuring aims to preserve the NLRB’s crucial role in adjudicating labor disputes while aligning its structure with constitutional principles concerning executive oversight. The adaptation seeks to maintain the agency’s effectiveness in protecting labor rights while accommodating the evolving judicial interpretation of executive power.

As the Supreme Court deliberates, the future of the NLRB hangs in balance, with significant implications for labor law enforcement and the broader landscape of U.S. administrative law. The proposed changes not only reflect a response to judicial challenges but also an opportunity to enhance the predictability and impartiality of labor relations adjudication.