On May 14, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California denied a request from the United Farm Workers (UFW) union for a preliminary injunction and a stay of implementation of the U.S. Department of Labor’s October 2025 Interim Final Rule (IFR) creating a new methodology for setting the Adverse Effect Wage Rate under the H-2A temporary agricultural worker visa program.

UFW’s briefs in support of its motions alleged that the union and farm workers in California and other states would suffer irreparable harm, primarily in the form of lost wages, should the Department be allowed to continue implementation of the IFR. In denying the motions, the court found UFW’s wage loss claims to be speculative, and took UFW’s nearly three-month delay seeking relief from the court as an indication of a lack of true urgency. Urgency and severity of potential irreparable harm to a plantiff’s interests are typically key factors supporting a request for a preliminary injunction and/or stay; the court found UFW’s claims insufficient on both counts.

In cases where a plaintiff is successful in demonstrating a likelihood of irreparable harm to its interests should the court fail to issue an injunction, a key factor in issuing a preliminary injunction is the court’s analysis of the likelihood of success on the merits. Since UFW failed to show irreparable harm, the court did not address the likelihood that UFW’s lawsuit will succeed on its merits.

The UFW’s lawsuit continues, with the UFW asking the court to strike down the IFR. The parties must now work out schedules for briefing and litigating the case.