Noncompetes remain a point of interest for the federal government even under the current administration. In 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) declined to continue to defend the blanket noncompete ban issued during the Biden administration, which was struck down in court. However, the FTC has not taken a complete step back from activity relating to noncompetes. We have prepared an FAQ to update you on the latest developments in the world of noncompetes and to help you understand how they impact your business.
What do employers need to know now?
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Remind me, what was the FTC’s proposed noncompete ban?
In 2024, the FTC issued a nationwide rule to prohibit noncompete agreements, seeking both to bar their future use and to invalidate most existing agreements. The ban quickly faced challenges in federal courts in Texas, Florida, and Pennsylvania.
What happened to the FTC’s ban?
A federal court in Texas struck it down. The rule therefore did not go into effect.
The FTC could have pursued an appeal of the Texas court’s decision. However, after President Trump was elected and changed the makeup of the FTC, the newly composed FTC acceded to the Texas court’s striking of the ban. The FTC also voted 3-1 to dismiss its appeals in the Texas and Florida cases. Essentially, the FTC raised a white flag and stopped contesting the prior unfavorable rulings. It appears to have done so because the newly composed FTC majority under the Trump administration agrees that the agency lacks the authority to regulate noncompetes nationally.
Does this mean the FTC is done going after noncompetes?
No. While the FTC abandoned the noncompete ban, it still has enforcement power. In a statement published as the FTC acceded to the court’s striking of the ban, FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson stated the FTC is continuing to investigate and to enforce “aggressively against noncompete agreements.”
So what has the FTC been doing about noncompetes since abandoning the ban?
A number of different things.
First, the FTC solicited information from the public about noncompete practices and perceived abuses. The FTC Chairman “invited the public to provide the Commission with information” to help it “better understand the scope, prevalence, and effects of noncompete agreements,” and “help the Commission prioritize resources for investigations and enforcement actions.”
The FTC also held a public workshop on noncompetes, titled “Moving Forward: Protecting Workers from Anticompetitive Noncompete Agreements.” The stated purpose of the workshop was “to highlight the negative impact of noncompete agreements on American workers and put businesses on notice of its current enforcement priorities.”
Check out our blog post, which dives deeper into the workshop and highlights the major takeaways.
Is the FTC doing anything more aggressive than holding workshops?
Yes, the agency has indicated it will still pursue enforcement actions against companies that use noncompetes unreasonably.
The FTC blocked Gateway Pet Memorial Services, a nationwide pet cremation business, from entering into, maintaining, or enforcing noncompete agreements, with limited exceptions. The FTC’s complaint alleged that Gateway Pet Memorial Services “knowingly wielded noncompete agreements to erect barriers in circumstances where it faced what it perceived to be tougher competition” in an effort to “curtail worker mobility and workers’ ability to negotiate better employment terms.” The consent order negotiated by the FTC applies to nearly 1,800 workers.
The FTC also ordered Rollins, Inc., a large, well-known pest-control company, to stop enforcing noncompete agreements against more than 18,000 employees nationwide. Rollins had noncompete agreements with nearly all its employees, including pest-control technicians and customer service representatives, typically low-wage earners, often prohibiting them from working in the pest-control industry for two years after their employment with Rollins ended.
The FTC also sent warning letters to 13 other pest-control companies, urging the firms to review their employment agreements to ensure they do not contain any unfair or anticompetitive noncompete provisions.
Is the FTC concerned about noncompetes in any specific industries?
Yes. The FTC has indicated it is particularly concerned about noncompetes in the healthcare space, especially within large healthcare employers and staffing firms. Chairman Ferguson sent letters to several large healthcare employers and staffing firms urging them to conduct a comprehensive review of their employment agreements—including any noncompetes or other restrictive agreements—to ensure they are appropriately tailored and comply with the law.
According to the FTC press release, many healthcare employers and staffing companies may include unreasonable noncompete agreements in employment contracts for essential roles, such as nurses, physicians, and other medical professionals. This can restrict healthcare workers’ career opportunities and, in turn, reduce patients’ freedom to choose their providers. The FTC observed that the negative impact of noncompetes in this arena is especially significant in rural communities, where access to medical care is already limited.
Have there been any other developments at the federal level regarding noncompetes beyond the FTC?
Very recently, proposed legislation regarding noncompetes, the Workforce Mobility Act of 2026, was introduced in Congress. The bipartisan bill is co-sponsored by Representative Peters from California and Representative Kean, Jr. from New Jersey.
The legislation proposes a California-style blanket ban on noncompetes for all workers, with narrow exceptions for noncompetes in connection with the sale of a business or the dissolution of a partnership. Representative Peters had previously introduced substantially similar legislation in 2020-2023.
As noncompetes gained attention in the media and politics over the last decade or more, there have been a number of bills introduced in Congress. However, none have passed. Particularly since this latest effort reflects an extremely aggressive approach toward curbing the use of noncompetes, the Workforce Mobility Act is believed to be unlikely to pass.
Have there been any major recent developments in Georgia noncompete law?
Noncompetes in Georgia are governed by the Georgia Restrictive Covenants Act (GRCA), which was enacted in 2011. The law surrounding noncompetes continues to develop as Georgia courts interpret different aspects of the GRCA. One appellate court recently held that a noncompete cannot prevent an employee from working for a competitor “in any capacity,” but another upheld a noncompete that prohibited the employee from engaging in work for a competitive business because the noncompete provided a good-faith estimate of the scope of prohibited activities. These decisions leave some uncertainty as to what restricted scope in a noncompete a Georgia court will enforce or reject.
The Georgia Supreme Court also unanimously held that certain restrictive covenants need not contain an explicit geographic limitation to be deemed geographically reasonable. But where a geographic limitation is implied, it must be reasonable. Based on the Court’s holding, the reasonableness analysis of noncompetes is arguably fact-specific, and the enforceability of a restrictive covenant may turn on the individual facts of each case.
Federal courts interpreting the GRCA are also increasingly willing to modify overbroad restrictive covenants by rewriting terms as long as the rewritten terms are narrowed. Traditionally, Georgia law allowed for blue-penciling only, through which courts can strike terms, but cannot rewrite them.
With new state and federal court opinions reflecting trial courts taking differing approaches to scrutinizing noncompetes, it is important for Georgia employers to consult knowledgeable counsel and to monitor the ever-evolving noncompete laws here.
What does all of this mean for my business?
Without a nationwide ban, noncompetes are subject to a patchwork of different states’ laws. Many states have recently imposed or considered complete bans, income limitations on employees who can be subject to noncompetes, exemptions for certain professions, and other limitations on noncompetes. Some states have banned the use of choice-of-law and venue provisions that would subject employees within their states to the laws of other jurisdictions. Some state laws even impose civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.
Given the variations in noncompete laws across the states, it is important, particularly for companies with employees in multiple jurisdictions, to consult an attorney specializing in noncompete law when implementing restrictive covenant agreements, when hiring employees from competitors, or when confronted with a departing employee who is violating their obligations.
BFV’s Noncompete/Trade Secrets team is closely monitoring noncompete developments nationwide and will continue to share updates through our blog. In the meantime, if you have questions about steps you or your business should take, we encourage you to contact us.