Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-1449_d9eh.pdf
Page Number: 24

Cite as:  598 U. S. ____ (2023) 

3 

JACKSON, J., dissenting 

A 
Congress’s passage of the NLRA “marked a fundamental
change in the Nation’s labor policies.”  Sears, Roebuck & Co. 
v. Carpenters, 436 U. S. 180, 190 (1978).  Prior to that point, 
union  activity  had  been  viewed  as  “a  species  of  ‘conspir-
acy,’ ”  prompting  substantial  conflict  between  labor  and 
management.  Ibid.  With  the  enactment  of  the  NLRA  in 
1935, “Congress expressly recognized that collective organ-
ization of segments of the labor force into bargaining units
capable  of  exercising  economic  power  comparable  to  that
possessed by employers may produce benefits for the entire
economy in the form of higher wages, job security, and im-
proved working conditions.”  Ibid. 

The heart of the NLRA is §7, which safeguards workers’ 
rights “to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor or-
ganizations, to bargain collectively through representatives
of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted ac-
tivities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mu-
tual aid or protection.”  29 U. S. C. §157.  Among the “ ‘con-
certed  activities’ ”  that  the  Act  unquestionably  protects  is
“the  vital,  economic  instrumen[t]  of  the  strike.”  Garmon, 
359 U. S., at 241; see §163.

Section  8  of  the  NLRA  provides  a  list  of  “unfair  labor
practice[s]” that employers and unions are prohibited from
engaging in.  §158.  For example, it is an unfair labor prac-
tice  for  an employer  to  “interfere with,  restrain,  or  coerce 
employees in the exercise of ” their §7 rights, including the 
right to strike.  §158(a)(1).  And it is an unfair labor practice 
for  a  union  to  “refuse  to  bargain  collectively  with  an  em-
ployer.”  §158(b)(3).  Taken  together,  §7  and  §8  establish 
certain  conduct  that  Congress  has  deemed  protected  (§7)
and prohibited (§8). 

B 
Congress  could  have  stopped  there.  But  “Congress  did 
not merely lay down a substantive rule of law to be enforced