Lisa Khan has written an editorial in the New York Times about essentially banning non-compete clauses for most workers. A non-compete clause says that you aren't allowed to work for a different company in the same industry and region as your current employer. Businesses use them to prevent competition for workers increasing wages. It's illegal for businesses to have a mutual agreement not to offer higher wages to compete for workers from each other, but non-compete clauses are a way to bypass that by basically telling the employee its illegal for them to take that better offer from the competitor.
Khan writing an editorial about a proposed rule is unusual. Government regulators often propose these rules and then have a public comment period where citizens basically voice their support or opposition. When the corporate world really doesn't like the proposed rules, they will often spend millions on Astroturf campaigns to create fake opposition.
I think Khan is trying to get public support to counteract that on the non-compete rule. Even though her article makes the case for why the rule is good and explains the public comment period, the link to the public comment is not provided and Khan stops short of actually advocating for people to support the rule. It feels like she's not allowed. But a rule banning non-compete clauses would be a huge win for the average worker and force companies to get out of the way of workers switching jobs in pursuit of pay increases if companies are unwilling to give raises internally. I strongly suggest everyone (from America) go support the ban.