Now they're banned, now they're not, the legal fight over non-compete agreements.

From Marketplace, I'm Sabrie Benashore in for David Brunkhachio.

Non-compete agreements, that is where your employer has you sign a contract promising you won't work for a competitor in the future.

Originally, they were used to protect intellectual property, but they've become so widespread they can apply to fast food workers or even pottery teachers.

The Federal Trade Commission wanted to ban these non-compete agreements.

A federal judge in Texas has blocked that ban.

Marketplace is Nancy Marshall Genser has the details. blocked that

BAN. The marketplace is Nancy Marshall Genser has the details. The Federal Trade Commission approved a rule last April

that says non-compete agreements are an unfair method of competition.

The rule was set to take effect next month. Non-competes

generally bar workers from going to work for a competitor. The FTC rule said

existing non-competes were not enforceable except for senior executives.

The agency said its rule would allow workers to make more money at a new job or start their

own businesses.

But yesterday, a U.S. District Court judge in Texas, Ada Brown, ruled the FTC

doesn't have the authority to ban non-competes. The White House issued a statement saying

it continues to support the FTC ban. The agency could appeal the Texas

judge's decision. A Florida judge also struck down the non-compete ban last week, although

a Pennsylvania judge upheld it over the summer.

The conflicting rulings mean the issue could be taken up by the Supreme Court.

I'm Nancy Marshall Genser for Marketplace. In the literal backdrop of this year's Democratic National Convention is its solidly blue host city of Chicago.

And while the Convention takes on some national economic themes, lowering the cost of health care, increasing the supply of housing,

...