National Labor Relations Board v. Ochoa Fertilizer Corp.

**What Happened** This case involved a dispute over how courts should handle agreements between the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and employers who violate workers' rights. Ochoa Fertilizer Corp. had apparently engaged in retaliation and discrimination against workers, likely for union activities. The NLRB and the company reached a settlement agreement (called a "consent order") where the company agreed to stop the illegal behavior. However, when the case went to court for approval, the Court of Appeals decided to change the terms of this agreement on its own, making it less favorable to workers. **What the Court Decided** The Supreme Court ruled that the Court of Appeals was wrong to modify the settlement agreement. The Court said that when the NLRB and an employer agree to a settlement, courts cannot just rewrite the terms unless there are very unusual circumstances. The original agreement between the NLRB and Ochoa Fertilizer was restored and enforced as originally written. **Why This Matters for Workers** This decision protects workers by ensuring that when the NLRB negotiates settlements with employers who break labor laws, those agreements will be enforced as written. Courts cannot weaken these settlements, which helps maintain the NLRB's ability to effectively resolve workplace violations.