Service Employees

43 Cited authorities

Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill
437 U.S. 153 (1978) Cited 1,520 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that budget appropriations cannot alter meaning of statute
Frisby v. Schultz
487 U.S. 474 (1988) Cited 909 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that residential streets are traditional public fora
DeBartolo Corp. v. Fla. Gulf Coast Trades Council
485 U.S. 568 (1988) Cited 729 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that a union’s distribution of handbills at the entrances of a shopping mall was not threatening, coercing, or restraining within meaning of section 8(b) because there had been "no violence, picketing, or patrolling," and "no suggestion that the leaflets had any coercive effect on customers of the mall"
Thornhill v. Alabama
310 U.S. 88 (1940) Cited 1,702 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a law is overbroad if it does not aim specifically at evils within the allowable area of control, but sweeps within its ambit other activities that constitute an exercise of First Amendment rights
National Woodwork Manufacturers Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
386 U.S. 612 (1967) Cited 392 times
Holding that union employees' refusal to install third-party manufacturer's product was not prohibited under § 158(b)(B), because it was an action "pressuring the [union members'] employer for agreements regulating relations between [the employer] and his own employees"
Railroad Trainmen v. Terminal Co.
394 U.S. 369 (1969) Cited 369 times
Holding that state court could not issue injunction against peaceful strike sought by third-party railroad terminal operator to avoid economic damages from shutdown of terminal
Labor Board v. Denver Bldg. Council
341 U.S. 675 (1951) Cited 494 times 1 Legal Analyses
Affirming Board's assertion of jurisdiction over activities taking place at local construction site based on finding that "any widespread application of the practices charged might well result in substantially decreasing" the flow of interstate commerce
Electrical Workers v. Labor Board
341 U.S. 694 (1951) Cited 246 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the prohibition of picketing in furtherance of unlawful objectives is not an abridgement of free speech
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Retail Store Employees Union, Local 1001
447 U.S. 607 (1980) Cited 82 times
Finding Congress struck a “delicate balance between union freedom of expression and the ability of neutral employers, employees, and consumers to remain free from coerced participation in industrial strife”
Longshoremen v. Allied International, Inc.
456 U.S. 212 (1982) Cited 74 times
Finding foreseeability relevant in determining damages, and rejecting argument that union did not foresee that refusing to handle a shipper's cargo would result in disruption of the shipper's business as facially implausible

Service Employees

43 Cited authorities

Holding that budget appropriations cannot alter meaning of statute

Holding that residential streets are traditional public fora

Holding that a law is overbroad if it does not aim specifically at evils within the allowable area of control, but sweeps within its ambit other activities that constitute an exercise of First Amendment rights

Holding that union employees' refusal to install third-party manufacturer's product was not prohibited under § 158(b)(B), because it was an action "pressuring the [union members'] employer for agreements regulating relations between [the employer] and his own employees"

Holding that state court could not issue injunction against peaceful strike sought by third-party railroad terminal operator to avoid economic damages from shutdown of terminal

Affirming Board's assertion of jurisdiction over activities taking place at local construction site based on finding that "any widespread application of the practices charged might well result in substantially decreasing" the flow of interstate commerce

Holding that the prohibition of picketing in furtherance of unlawful objectives is not an abridgement of free speech

Finding Congress struck a “delicate balance between union freedom of expression and the ability of neutral employers, employees, and consumers to remain free from coerced participation in industrial strife”

Finding foreseeability relevant in determining damages, and rejecting argument that union did not foresee that refusing to handle a shipper's cargo would result in disruption of the shipper's business as facially implausible