New Federal Bill Hikes Penalties to 20 Years for Commerce Interference, Carves Out Local Jurisdiction for Minor Labor Disputes

The “Freedom From Union Violence Act of 2025” is looking to redraw the lines on when the federal government gets involved in disputes, specifically those involving threats or violence during labor actions. This bill amends Section 1951 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, which deals with interfering with commerce—essentially business operations—through robbery or extortion. It’s a classic piece of legislation that looks like it’s doing two things at once: making federal penalties much harsher for serious offenses while simultaneously stepping back from minor ones.

The Federal Hammer Gets Heavier

First, let’s talk about the big stick. If someone obstructs commerce through robbery or extortion, or threatens physical violence to carry out that plan, the maximum federal penalty is significantly increased. We’re talking about a fine up to $100,000 and up to 20 years in prison. For context, “extortion” here means getting property from someone by threatening force, violence, or putting them in fear, or even pretending to have official authority. If you’re a business owner whose operations cross state lines—which is most businesses these days, thanks to the bill’s broad definition of “commerce”—this means the federal government has a much stronger deterrent for anyone trying to shut you down violently or coerce you.

The Minor Incident Carve-Out

Now for the twist: the bill creates a specific exemption for conduct during a labor dispute. If the actions only involve minor bodily injury or minor property damage—and are not part of a larger, coordinated pattern of violent activity—then the federal government steps back entirely. In these specific, minor situations, only state and local authorities can prosecute the case. Think of a minor scuffle on a picket line or a small amount of vandalism during a strike. The bill is essentially saying, “If it’s small potatoes, keep it local.” This is a big deal because it limits federal overreach in smaller, localized labor disputes, which could be a relief for local law enforcement and courts.

Where the Devil Lives in the Details

While the exemption for minor incidents seems like a jurisdictional clarification, the terms used are pretty squishy. What exactly counts as “minor bodily injury”? A bruise? A sprain? That lack of precise definition could lead to arguments in court about whether a case should be handled federally or locally. If a federal prosecutor decides the injury wasn’t “minor” enough, they can still bring the full weight of the federal system, including that new 20-year maximum sentence. For striking workers or activists, this vagueness means the line between a locally prosecuted misdemeanor and a federally prosecuted felony is still blurry, making the risk calculation significantly higher.

What Stays the Same

It’s important to note what this bill doesn’t change. It explicitly leaves existing federal labor laws untouched—things like the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the Norris-LaGuardia Act are still in effect. This bill is purely focused on the criminal side of the house, specifically targeting violent acts that interfere with commerce, regardless of whether they happen during a labor dispute or not. The message is clear: if you cross the line into robbery or serious extortion, the federal consequences are about to get a lot more severe, even as the feds promise to leave the smaller stuff to the states.