Today in Supreme Court History: February 9, 1937

2/9/1937: NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. argued.

Comments

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Okay. He deleted the one with all the comments.

Today's case involves the regulation of interstate commerce.

The 5-4 majority did not follow the old "manufacturing alone isn't interstate commerce" approach. It involves regulating unions.

Unions are very important for the peaceful and smooth regulation of interstate commerce. They also raise First Amendment issues as economic associations and means to petition.

There was a path not taken here. Unions also are necessary to safeguard free labor. There are 13A connotations.

https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-promises-of-liberty/9780231520133

[Stupid Government Tricks]

No, unions are a travesty only "necessary" because governments take sides.

* Governments force employers to pretend quitting workers have not quit and are still employed even while not paying them.

* Governments allow union monopolies but not employer monopolies.

If governments hadn't favored employers, it wouldn't have to "correct" the problem by favoring unions.

[Katall]

Of course employers can be monopolies. If there is a union that deals with many companies, those companies can band together to represent the employer side. See, e.g., the NFL.
The problem in the late 19th century was that employers were monopolies, so unions were needed to even the playing field.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

Imagine the Detroit car manufacturers even banding together to lock out all UAW workers if they strike against any single one. Or if Lockheed and other aerospace manufacturers had locked out their workers when Boeing had their strike. Or if west coast ports had locked out their dock workers for the east coast strike.

Ain't gonna happen. Your theory is nonsense.

[Katall]

If the car makers banded together to negotiate with the unions, there would be no problem with the scenario you lay out. But it won't happen, because the car mailers do not want this.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

You are willfully blind if you don't think the government would come down on them like a ton of bricks.

[Dr. Ed 2]

"back in the early 1960s, Congress gave the league an exemption to federal antitrust laws"

https://www.washingtonian.com/2021/12/03/congress-could-really-hurt-the-nfl-if-it-wants-to/

[Stupid Government Tricks]

Thank you. Far as I know, all major sports have some kinds of exemption. The baseball one stinks the worst.

[Katall]

Not my understanding. MLS gets around the exemption because each team in nominally owned by the league. Otherwise, MLB is the only league with an exemption.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

And again, you are willfully blind if you think the government is not turning a blind eye to all this and could change on a moment's notice if they got a burr up their butt.

[Dr. Ed 2]

And this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-UdK5n0vno

The NFL is a bad example...

[Katall]

Why? Because Trump was denied a franchise?