Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-1449_d9eh.pdf
Page Number: 48

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

27 

JACKSON, J., dissenting 

Garmon, the bedrock case on that issue.  The Court’s ruling 
is  likely  to  cause  considerable  confusion  among  the  lower 
courts about what Garmon requires.  And any such confu-
sion not only threatens to encroach upon the Board’s pre-
rogatives,  as  Congress  has  assigned  them,  but  also  risks
erosion of the right to strike.

Yet, the posture of this case provides an opportunity  to
mitigate  the  results of  the  majority’s  errors.    On  remand, 
the state court should dismiss Glacier’s complaint without
prejudice  or  stay  its  proceedings  in  view  of  the  General 
Counsel’s complaint.  Meanwhile, the Board—which is not 
bound by the allegations in Glacier’s complaint when mak-
ing its assessment, and is well equipped to make findings
of fact concerning the strike conduct at issue—should pro-
ceed  to  determine  whether  Glacier  has  interfered  with 
strike conduct that is protected by the NLRA, as alleged by
the General Counsel.