Noncompete employment contracts, agreements that prohibit employees from joining competing firms for some duration, are prevalent in the U.S. labor market. About 64% of executives in publicly listed firms have signed noncompete contracts. Moreover, these arrangements have permeated into broader labor markets. A survey by Prescott, Bishara, and Starr (2016) indicates that about 30 million workers (roughly 18% of the entire workforce) are subject to such constraints. The anticompetitive effects of such contracts are concerning: restricted labor mobility precludes the reallocation of workers to more productive employment and inhibits the entry of new firms.1 Employers, conversely, argue that noncompete contracts offer the protection they need to carry out investments. The disagreement over the merits of noncompete contracts has manifested itself in the disparate legal landscape across the country: many states take a permissive stance; others, notably California, ban noncompete contracts altogether. Recent attempts and progress in legal reform have aimed to emulate the California noncompete law, promoting a more mobile labor market.