Document: 361 U.S. 363 80 S.Ct. 391 4 L.Ed.2d 373 LOCAL NO. 8—6, OIL, CHEMICAL AND ATOMIC WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO, et al., Appellants,v.MISSOURI. No. 42. Argued Nov. 19, 1959. Decided Jan. 25, 1960. Mr. Mozart G. Ratner, Chicago, Ill., for appellants. Robert R. Welborn, Jefferson, Mo., appellee. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This is an appeal from a judgment Supreme Court Missouri affirming decree which enjoined appellants continuing strike against St. Louis public utility. The upheld constitutionality certain provisions law, commonly known as King-Thompson Act, authorizes Governor on behalf State to take possession and operate utility affected by work stoppage when in his 'the interest, health welfare are jeopardized,' exercise such authority necessary insure operation utility.'1 2 In state courts this have contended that law conflicts with federal legislation enacted under Commerce Clause Federal Constitution, it violates Due Process Fourteenth Amendment. Because doubt whether controversy was moot, we postponed further consideration question jurisdiction hearing case merits. 359 982, 79 941, 3 932. labor unions represent employees Laclede Gas Company, corporation engaged business selling natural gas area. spring 1956 notified their desire negotiate changes terms collective bargaining agreement expire year. Extended negotiations were conducted, but no new reached, upon expiration existing contract June 30, 1956, went out strike.2 Five days later issued proclamation stating after investigation he believed health, jeopardy, seizure company's continued operation. executive order same day took 'possession' 'for use interest.' A second provided all 'rules regulations * governing internal management organization company, its duties responsibilities, shall remain force effect throughout term Missouri.' After violation statute,3 filed suit injunction them Circuit Louis.4 At end three-day trial court entered enjoining strike, amendment declared entire Act constitutional valid. 'On July 14, issued, terminated. On August 10, signed agreement, October 31, ended seizure. 5 Missouri, although noting had 'expired own terms,' nevertheless proceeded consider merits appellants' contentions. restricted consideration, however, those sections 'directly involved' 'Section 295.180, relating power seizure, subparagraphs (1) (6) Section 295.200 RSMo, V.A.M.S., making unlawful or concerted refusal giving enforce other means.'5 317 S.W.2d at page 316. upholding these explicitly declined pass sought attack, stating: 'The considered severable may stand independently remainder Act. Although defendants argue strenuously contrary, made record determination section 295.090, pertaining written minimum duration 295.200, 2, 3, 5, monetary penalties loss seniority. We, therefore, refrain expressing any reference thereto.' 323. Accordingly, 'limited modified' so remove possible intimation been held constitutional, than necessarily sustaining validity injunction.6 6 has long since cannot escape conclusion there 'actual matters essential decision particular before it.' United States v. Alaska S.S. Co., 253 113, 116, 40 448, 449, 64 L.Ed. 808. Whatever practice duty 'is decide actual controversies can be carried into effect, not give opinions moot questions abstract propositions, declare principles rules affect matter issue Mills Green, 159 651, 653, 16 132, 293. See Amalgamated Ass'n Street, Electric Railway & Motor Coach Employees, etc. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board, 340 416, 71 373, 95 389. To express contentions would ignore basic limitation function Court, disregard judicial administration established repeatedly followed.7 7 Harris Battle, 348 803, 75 34, 99 634, given concrete application context parallel control disposition primary here. That originated action enjoin enforcement Virginia statute, markedly similar ordered taken transit company whose strike. dispute subsequently settled terminated, case, holding constitutional. 32 L.R.R.M. 83. refused appeal. 195 Va. lxxxviii. urged because threat future disputes.8 It argued State's abandonment alleged unconstitutional activity objective accomplished should permitted forestall statute purported act.9 situation akin cases like Southern Pac. Terminal Co. Interstate Comm., 219 498, 514—516, 31 279, 283—284, 55 310.10 finding rejected 634. Upon must present case. also Barker Painting Local 734, Brotherhood Painters, etc., 281 462, 50 356, 74 967; Commercial Cable Burleson, 250 360, 39 512, 63 1030. 8 However, point out, Battle completely dispositive here because, unlike contains impose: continue seizure;11 (2) seniority participating strike.12 found separable involved carefully refrained passing validity.13 noted liability asserted separate lawsuit, 314, parties informed us still pending courts. 9 We agree pendency litigation gives life When claim litigated will subject review, now anticipate outcome. "Constitutional dealt abstractly' *. They anticipated only they appropriately raised us. Nor assume advance construe bring conflict Constitution act Congress.' Allen-Bradley Local, 315 740, 746, 62 820, 824, 86 1154. 10 guiding principle well illustrated American Book Kansas, 193 49, 24 394, 48 613. There Kansas ousted appellant doing until complied local foreign corporations. Pending satisfied complying requirements statute. But meanwhile brought another void contracts prior date compliance. "there exists controversy, undetermined unsettled,' involving right interstate commerce.' 51, 395. What said rejecting argument dismissing entirely relevant '(T)hat issues. Our extends over limited conditions us.' 52, 396. Alejandrino Quezon, 271 528, 46 600, 70 1071. 11 rights even more speculative. Almost four years passed concede deprive Moreover, relates imposes legal sanctions unions, makes rehires without seniority.14 unlikely event proceeding having done so, way know what outcome might be.15 12 asked review injunction, expired three ago. Any ours late 'would wholly ineffectual want subject-matter could operate. An affirmance ostensibly require something already place. reversal avoid beyond recall. One vain other. adjudicate cause longer uniformly entertain.' Brownlow Schwartz, 261 216, 217 218, 43 263, 264, 67 620. 13 vacated, remanded proceedings deemed appropriate. 14 Vacated remanded. 15 BLACK, whom CHIEF JUSTICE BRENNAN join, dissenting. think moot. As Court's points liable members lose illegal law. Its ended. then if now. treated live we. Otherwise, union constantly threats injunctions validly applied 17 wrongfulness emphasized our belief plainly unless wants overrule 383, 359, 364, adopt views dissenters follow reverse Chapter 295 Revised Statutes 1949, V.A.M.S. Mo.Rev.Stat., § All represented appellants, approximately 2,200, participated strike; 300 supervisors others units remained work. Rev.Stat., subd. 1, provides: 'It person, employee, representative defined chapter call, incite, support participate plant, equipment facility chapter, means enforcing demands state.' 6, equitable remedies provision rule regulation prescribed governor hereunder.' notes 4, supra. did reaffirm earlier (State ex rel. Board Mediation Pigg, 362 Mo. 798, 244 75) panels, '(t)o extent predicate additional concerned *.' 315. See, e.g., Singer Mfg. Wright, 141 696, 103, 35 906; People California San Pablo Tulare 149 308, 876, 37 747; 293; 613; Hamburg-American 239 466, 36 212, 60 387; 1030; 808; 620; 1071; 967. jurisdictional statement 111, O.T. 1954, pp. 12—13. Ibid. Rev.Stat.1949, 'Any paragraph forfeit pay school fund state, sum ten thousand dollars each resulting called, incited, supported, continues, recovered civil name used name.' employ person employee who violated except employed employee.' pages 366—367 U.S., 394 S.Ct., Since neither statutory nor turns quite where very imposed financial liability. involve 'perpetual' injunction. note 417—418, 374—375, 12, appellee asserts do deny penalty provisions.

Category: 8