ALABAMA

v.

TEXAS ET AL.; AND RHODE ISLAND V. LOUISIANA ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Guss v. Utah Labor Relations Bd., 353 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1957)
  …ned or obviously would decline to exercise its jurisdiction but has not ceded jurisdiction pursuant to the proviso to § 10 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act.1 It is a question we left open in Building Trades Council v. Kinard Construction Co., 346 U. S. 933. Some background is necessary for an understanding of this problem in federal-state relations and how it assumed its present importance. Since it was first enacted in 1935, the National Labor Relations Act2 has empowered the National Labor Relation…
• Weber v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 348 U.S. 468 (U.S. 1955)
  …to pass on the union’s picketing is delegated by the Taft-Hartley Act to the National Labor Relations Board. See also Plankinton Packing Co. v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board, 338 U. S. 953; Building Trades Council v. Kinard Construction Co., 346 U. S. 933. And in Capital Service, Inc. v. Labor Board, 347 U. S. 501, a picket line established at retail stores to induce the organization of a manufacturer’s employees was enjoined by the State as contrary to its public policy.5 [*476] This Court granted a…
• Int'l Ass'n of MacHinists v. Gonzales, 356 U.S. 617 (U.S. 1958)
  …v. Farnsworth & Chambers Co., 353 U. S. 969; Retail Clerks International Assn. v. J. J. Newberry Co., 352 U. S. 987; Pocatello Building & Constr. Trades Council v. C. H. Elle Constr. Co., 352 U. S. 884; Building Trades Council v. Kinard Constr. Co., 346 U. S. 933. With the exception of cases allowing the State to exercise its police power to punish or prevent violence, United A., A. & A. I. W. v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board, 351 U. S. 266; Youngdahl v. Rainfair, Inc., 355 U. S. 131, the broad holdin…