Document: 493 U.S. 103 110 S.Ct. 444 107 L.Ed.2d 420 GOLDEN STATE TRANSIT CORP., Petitioner,v.CITY OF LOS ANGELES. No. 88-840. Argued Oct. 3, 1989. Decided Dec. 5, Syllabus After this Court held that respondent city had violated federal law by conditioning the renewal of petitioner's taxicab franchise on settlement a pending labor dispute between petitioner and its union, Golden State Transit Corp. v. Los Angeles, 475 608, 106 1395, 89 616 (Golden I ), District enjoined to reinstate franchise. However, court concluded 42 U.S.C. § 1983 did not authorize compensatory damages award, since Supremacy Clause does create individual rights may be vindicated in an action for under 1983; since, even though city's conduct was pre-empted National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) I, there been no "direct violation" statute, Act's comprehensive enforcement scheme precluded resort 1983. The Appeals affirmed. Held: Petitioner is entitled maintain damages. Pp. 105-113. (a) Clause, own force, enforceable "is source any rights"; rather, it " 'secure[s]' according them priority whenever they come conflict with state law." Chapman Houston Welfare Rights Organization, 441 600, 613, 99 1905, 1913, 60 508. 107-108. (b) NLRA grants A remedy existence scheme, provides mechanism address interference federally protected rights. Moreover, argument violate secured rejected, intended beneficiary statutory gives parties collective-bargaining agreement right make use "economic weapons," expressly set forth NLRA, free or governmental interference. Machinists Wisconsin Employment Comm'n, 427 132, 150, 96 2548, 2558, 49 396. violation implicit statute's language structure as much clearly text statute. 108-112. 857 F.2d 631 (CA9 1988); reversed remanded. STEVENS, J., delivered opinion Court, which BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, SCALIA, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, filed dissenting opinion, REHNQUIST, C.J., O'CONNOR, joined, post, p. 113. Zachary D. Fasman, Washington, D.C., petitioner. John F. Haggerty, Cal., respondent. Justice STEVENS Court. 1 In (1986) we union. On remand, but (1982 ed.)1 award reasoned "the supremacy clause Section 1983," 660 F.Supp. 571, 578 (CD Cal.1987), preempted (NLRA), Stat. 449, amended, 29 151 et seq. ed. Supp. V), cause lie because statute 1983.2 1988). We granted certiorari limited question whether 489 1010, 109 1117, 180 (1989). 2 * deprivation rights, privileges, immunities Constitution laws." As plainly indicates, encompasses violations well constitutional have repeatedly coverage must broadly construed. See, e.g., Felder Casey, 487 131, 139, 108 2302, 2307, 101 123 (1988); Maine Thiboutot, 448 1, 4, 100 2502, 2504, 65 555 (1980); cf. United States Price, 383 787, 801, 86 1152, 1160, 16 267 (1966). It "against all forms official rights." Monell New York City Dept. Social Services, 436 658, 700-701, 98 2018, 2040-2041, 56 611 (1978). 3 determination available involves two-step inquiry. First, plaintiff assert right. See Middlesex County Sewerage Authority Sea Clammers Assn., 453 19, 2615, 2625, 69 435 (1981). speaks terms "rights, immunities," law. deciding has violated, considered provision creates obligations binding unit rather "does more than express congressional preference certain kinds treatment." Pennhurst School Hospital Halderman, 451 1531, 1541, 67 694 interest asserts "too vague amorphous" "beyond competence judiciary enforce." Wright Roanoke Redevelopment Housing Authority, 479 418, 431-432, 766, 775-776, 93 781 (1987). also asked "intend[ed] benefit" putative plaintiff. Id., at 430, 774; see id., 433, 775 (O'CONNOR, dissenting) (citing Cort Ash, 422 66, 78, 95 2080, 2088, 45 26 (1975)). 4 Second, when asserted right, defendant show Congress "specifically foreclosed Smith Robinson, 468 992, 1005, n. 9, 104 3457, 3464, 82 746 (1984), providing "comprehensive mechanis[m] protection right," 1003, S.Ct., 3463; (1981); Preiser Rodriguez, 411 475, 1827, 36 439 (1973). availability administrative mechanisms protect plaintiff's interests necessarily sufficient demonstrate foreclose remedy. Wright, U.S., 425-428, 771-773; Rosado Wyman, 397 397, 420, 90 1207, 1221, 25 442 (1970). Rather, framework such "[a]llowing plaintiff" bring "would inconsistent Congress' carefully tailored scheme." Smith, 1012, 3468. burden withdrawn defendant. 423, 770; Clammers, 21, 31, 2626, 31. 'We do lightly conclude preclude reliance remedy' right." 423-424, 770-771 (quoting 3468, 746). 5 Respondent argues Clause,3 agree. "[T]hat 508 (1979); Swift & Co. Wickham, 382 111, 258, 15 194 (1965).4 Given variety situations preemption claims asserted, court, would obviously incorrect assume pursuant exists every time rule pre-empts regulatory authority. Conversely, fact possibility same 6 cases, turns interpreted, "sufficiently specific definite" within enforce," 432, 775, benefit plaintiff, "by other evidence from itself," 770. II 7 nub controversy "rights" management are against argue, nor could it, scheme. Although Board (NLRB Board) exclusive jurisdiction prevent unfair practices employers unions, authority interference.5 There thus preventing Nor can substantial our holding enforce. cannot liable NLRA. basis previous reject argument. agree prevents process 8 just "occupied field" legislation passed solely general public mind. circumstances, pre-emption benefits particular only incident regulation, private available. however, both one another State.6 By terms, confers "generally employees merely employer." Hill Florida ex rel. Watson, 325 538, 545, 1373, 1376, L.Ed. 1782 (1945) (Stone, concurring part part); Motor Coach Employees Missouri, 374 74, 83 1657, 10 763 (1963); Bd., 340 383, 71 359, 364 (1951); Automobile Workers O'Brien, 339 454, 458, 70 781, 783, 94 978 (1950). stated "[i]f regulates actually law, . follows matter substantive Brown Hotel Employees, 491, 503, 3179, 3186, 373 (1984). interference, moreover, those explicitly "The long understood range interference." Industry Gould Inc., 282, 290, 1057, 1063, 223 (1986). Telephone Labor, 440 519, 552, 1328, 1347, 59 553 (1979) (Powell, ("What left unregulated important regulations imposed. sought leave essentially bargain govern their relationship"). And, contrary contention, '[r]esort economic weapons should peaceful measures avail' employer employee." 147, 2556, 396 (1976) American Ship Building NLRB, 380 300, 317, 85 955, 966, 13 855 (1965)). 9 based doctrine identified decision supra. That fundamentally different San Diego Trades Council Garmon, 359 236, 79 773, (1959), over arguably prohibited maintaining uniformity administration jurisdiction. Railroad Trainmen Jacksonville Terminal Co., 394 369, 382, 17, 1109, 22 344 (1969).7 Machinists, reiterated give Act, 2558. "[T]he intent enacting relations" required types "must regulation." 155, 256. zone "whether State," 153, 2559, excluded.8 argument, secure duties persuasive. held, language, structure, history protects While true case enumerated section might said respect number found language. product judicial interpretation vague, ambiguous, incomplete less plain meaning 11 designed—as Garmon rule—to answer apply conduct. akin denies either sovereign abridge personal liberty. welfare (1980), prescribed portion rent (1987), being regulation "peaceful methods putting pressure upon another," 154, 2560, specifically conferred NLRA.9 Of course, retract statutorily liberty will, Thiboutot relieve itself declining funds. Cf. Guardians Assn. Civil Service Comm'n City, 463 582, 596, 3221, 3229, 77 866 (1983) (opinion J.); 1221. But while remains effect, guarantee freedom abridge. 12 respondent's refusal renew permissible tactics withstand strike. Because recognized exception broad remedial scope 1983, reverse judgment Appeals. remanded further proceedings consistent opinion. so ordered. 14 whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE O'CONNOR join, dissenting. majority concludes ed.) requires Angeles pay violating company's employ collective bargaining without With respect, dissent. majority's discussion consider these statutes provide Our I), power condition State's operating imposing interfere lack sense immunized city, my view immunity enjoin statutes. 17 From earliest cases interpreting most recent ones, acknowledged party local ground both, allocate enact Government, exclusion States. litigant standing contend proper allocation outcome dispute, parties, Gibbons Ogden, Wheat. 23 (1824); Willson Black Bird Creek Marsh Pet. 245, 412 (1829); Hauenstein Lynham, 483, 628 (1880), subdivisions, Cooley Wardens Port Philadelphia, How. 299, 996 (1852); Burbank Lockheed Air Terminal, 624, 1854, 547 (1973); Ray Atlantic Richfield 151, 988, 55 179 injured need vest him attempted exercise control violates distribution powers system. 18 submit interpret wrong committed entities misapprehending precise location boundaries power. greater transgression this. through pre-emption, legal State, infringed, follow obtain relief 19 two relations encompass interests. first relation striking establishes union each and, correlatives duties, other. Under example, duty good faith faith. 158(d) ed.). correct determine allegations injury implicate flow relation. 631, 635 20 jural State. detailed way how act renewing franchise, pre-emptive effect Clause. When analyzed (1976), ruled that, although NLRB affords regulate activities peripheral concern, 137, 2552, influence agreements, 147-151, 2556-2558. Applying dispute. 618, 1400. 21 rise correlative discuss I. chosen call ante, 112. prefer familiar Hohfeldian terminology say Hohfeld, Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions Applied Judicial Reasoning, Yale L.J. 16, 55-58 (1913) (defining immunity). This best reflects described Machinists. 2559. III before us today asks applies pre-emption. answered decisions, "an allegation incompatibility not, itself, claim 'secured Constitution' [28 U.S.C.] 1343" or, agrees, 615, 1914, (discussing 28 1343(3) (1976 ed.), jurisdictional counterpart 1983). instead, privilege, order 1914. preceding analysis shows arose out created Unlike majority, think secures contemplated Chapman. uses word "secure" mean "protect" "make certain," Hague Committee Industrial 307 496, 526-527, 954, 969, 1423 (1939) Stone, J.), securing "any person, rights," Carter Greenhow, 114 322, 928, 930, 202 (1885). distinguishes resulting Federal Governments. Representative Shellabarger, who sponsored bill became Cong. Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 317 (1871), explained distinction follows: 24 "Most provisions Constitution, restrain directly relate States, tenth article, 'no shall treaty,' 'grant letters marque,' 'coin money,' 'emit bills credit,' c., divisions political General They persons therein. These prohibitions nature be, been, occasion arose, enforced courts declaring void acts encroachment powers. Thus, sufficiently, 'enforced' Constitution. some class. where liabilities States." App. 69. Shellabarger spoke years expanded beyond sponsor various well. 774-775, (1987) (right calculation housing Brooke Amendment 1937, 1437a V)); 2-3, 2503-2504, (1980) Security 602(a)(7) ed.)). None interests, sole result Pre-emption concerns Nation individuals. finds "akin liberty," 112, describes employees, ibid., 27 primary apart character. Machinists' noted above, rests immunities. Government exercised Commerce deprived relations. decisions suggest immunity, defined nothing substance requirement imposed bargaining. instance, exercising actions taken city. permits company object individual, instead results Clause's separate division such, differs character constitutes element seeks vindicate Monroe Pape, 365 167, 81 473, 492 (1961). So too unlike Thiboutot. plaintiffs sued officials withholding particular, claimed, many words, defendants duty, gave paid. 2503-2504. Court's expansive allowed recover 2504. case, help plaintiffs' benefits. IV 30 concluding Despite what increase litigation years, offer. survive summary claim, purport ruling cite provision. omission perhaps stemmed recognition seeking declaratory equitable district 1331 ed.); 2201; 2202 525, 1332, (plaintiff injunctive claim). limit complaint, 6, 7, enter injunction behalf company, reasons stated. provides: "Every person who, color ordinance, custom, usage, Territory Columbia, subjects, causes subjected, citizen thereof laws, suit equity, proceeding redress." "As correctly notes, 8(d) specifically, Teamster drivers collateral third process. way, contact defines concept engaged bargaining, issue states failure concession during negotiations practice. Supreme relied City's forcing strain purpose misconstrue import find 'directly violated' virtue took section." F.Supp., 578-579. Article VI, cl. 2, "This Laws made Pursuance thereof; Treaties made, supreme Law Land; Judges bound thereby, Thing Contrary notwithstanding." involved predecessor 1343(a)(3) civil "[t]o redress deprivation, custom privilege equal citizens observed if prepositional phrase, referring claims, included additional Acts citizens, superfluous. Chapman, entire reference therefore include Ibid. If were "and laws" wholly unnecessary. immunities" mistaken management, Act. stressed distinctions (1984); 145, 2555, (1976); (1969). 1(b) Taft-Hartley 141(b) pertinent part: "It policy chapter prescribe legitimate affecting commerce. ." divests prohibits Sears, Roebuck Carpenters, 180, 193-198, 1745, 1755-1758, 209 (1978); Belknap, Inc. Hale, 510, 3172, 3183, 798 (1983), involving provided means bringing Board, Longshoremen Davis, 476 380, 393, 10, 1904, 389 "avoids potential agencies ensuring responsibility applying body NLRB." 502, 3185. "Apart notions 'primary jurisdiction,' objection courts' NLRB's concurrent Act." Roebuck, 199, 1758 (footnote omitted). Referring aspects process, wrote: "Our hold meant activities, regulable neither 'afforded flexibility picking choosing devices branded unlawful.' [NLRB Insurance Agents, 361 477, 498, 80 419, 431, 454 (1960).] attempt 'introduce standard properly "balanced" power,' 477], 497 [80 (1960) ] omitted), define 'what sanctions permitted negotiating "ideal" bargaining.' 500 433]." 149-150, 2557-2558. Bomar Keyes, 162 136 (CA2) (L. Hand, J.) (statutory sit jury State), cert. denied, 332 825, 68 166, 92 400 (1947).

Category: 1