May 13 (Reuters) - A National Labor Relations Board

administrative judge has opted not to delve into Starbucks' ( SBUX )

claims that the agency's structure is unconstitutional, while

ruling that the coffee chain committed various labor law

violations at a unionized New Orleans store.

Administrative Law Judge Geoffrey Carter in a decision on

Friday said he lacks the authority to rule on constitutional

issues, and the claims made by Starbucks ( SBUX ) - along with SpaceX,

Amazon, and Trader Joe's in other cases - are "a matter for the

federal courts to decide."

"Ruling on the constitutional question here would entail

halting (at least in part) the operation of the agency, and such

a step would be in tension with my duty to faithfully administer

the [National Labor Relations] Act," he wrote.

Carter did not weigh the merits of Starbucks' ( SBUX ) claims that

the NLRB's in-house enforcement proceedings and protections from

removal for administrative judges and board members violate the

U.S. Constitution.

Starbucks ( SBUX ) can ask the five-member board to review the

decision, and then appeal its ruling to a federal appeals court.

In a statement, the company said: "Our focus continues to be

on training and supporting our managers to ensure respect of our

partners' rights to organize and on progressing negotiations

towards ratified store contracts this year."

Workers United, the union behind a nationwide campaign to

organize Starbucks ( SBUX ) locations, did not respond to a request for

comment.

The ruling is the first by an NLRB judge in a growing number

of cases attacking the agency's structure, including by Amazon

and Trader Joe's in pending board cases and SpaceX in two

separate lawsuits seeking to block the board from hearing

complaints against the rocket maker.

The board in case filings has said the claims lack merit and

NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo last month argued that the

companies bringing the challenges are attempting to distract

from their violations of workers' rights to organize and

advocate for better working conditions.

Starbucks ( SBUX ) is facing dozens of complaints accusing it of

illegal conduct amid the union campaign, including that it fired

union supporters, threatened and interrogated workers and

shuttered stores to thwart organizing.

Starbucks ( SBUX ) has generally denied wrongdoing and said it

respects workers' labor rights, and has argued that some workers

were properly fired for violating company policies and not for

union activity.

Workers United and Starbucks ( SBUX ) last month began negotiations

on what they called a "foundational framework" to guide union

organizing and collective bargaining at unionized stores across

the country, which could include settling many of the

outstanding NLRB cases.

In Friday's ruling, Carter found that Starbucks ( SBUX ) had

committed four violations of the NLRA in the time leading up to

a 2022 union election at the New Orleans store. That included

firing a pro-union barista who participated in a strike and

barring workers from posting union flyers on a communication

board, the judge said.

The case is Starbucks Corp ( SBUX ) and Workers United, National

Labor Relations Board, No. 15-CA-296254.

For Starbucks ( SBUX ): Emma Chase-Swartz and Charles Powell of

Littler Mendelson

For the NLRB General Counsel: Aisleyne Calianos, Andrew

Miragliotta, and Veronica Rompelman

For the union: Sarai King Oza of Deats Durst & Owen

Read more:

Amazon joins companies arguing US labor board is

unconstitutional

NLRB's Abruzzo hits back at 'low-road' companies challenging

agency's structure

Starbucks ( SBUX ) agrees to US union organizing 'framework'

SpaceX wins temporary block on NLRB case over fired

engineers

US Supreme Court leans toward Starbucks ( SBUX ) in the case of

pro-union workers

(Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York)