Legal Document

398 U.S. 281 90 Supreme Court Reporter 1739 26 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 234 ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, Petitioner,v.BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS et al. Number 477. Argued March 2 and 3, 1970. Decided June 8, Frank X. Friedmann, Jr., Jacksonville, Fla., Dennis G. Lyons, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Allan Milledge, Miami, respondents. Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Congress in 1793, shortly after American Colonies became one united Nation, provided that federal courts 'a writ injunction (shall not) be granted to stay proceedings any court a state.' Act 2, § 5, Statutes-at-Large 335. Although certain exceptions this general prohibition have been added, statute, directing state shall remain free from interference by courts, has remained effect until time. Today amended statute provides: 'A may not grant an State except as expressly authorized Congress, or where necessary aid its jurisdiction, protect effectuate judgments.' 28 Code KF62 2283. 3 Despite existence longstanding prohibition, case did enjoin petitioner, Atlantic Coast Line Railroad company (ACL),1 invoking issued Florida which prohibited picketing respondent Brotherhood Locomotive Engineers (BLE). The arose following way. 4 In 1967 BLE began Moncrief Yard, switching yard located near Florida, wholly owned operated ACL.2 As soon ACL went into seeking injunction. When judge denied request, immediately there succeeded obtaining No further legal action was taken dispute two years later 1969, Court's decision Trainmen versus Jacksonville Terminal Co., 394 369, 89 1109, 22 344 (1969). considered validity against other unions at Terminal, next Yard. reviewed factual situation surrounding concluded had federally protected right picket under Railway Labor Act, 44 577, amended, 45 151 seq., could interfered with injunctions. Immediately petition rehearing case, 1024, 1622, 23 51 (1969), filed motion dissolve Yard injunction, arguing improper. refused holding controlling. union elect appeal directly, but instead back requested enforcement District Judge upon application pending filing disposition certiorari, granted. 396 1201, 9, 24 Appeals summarily affirmed on parties' stipulation, we certiorari consider court's court. 901, 220, 177 5 contends proper either 'to effectuate' denial 1967, 'necessary of' jurisdiction. questions are no means simple clear, is difficult, conclude justified these anti-injunction statute. We therefore hold 6 * Before analyzing specific arguments advanced think it would helpful discuss background policy led pass 1793. While all reasons adopt restriction clear,3 certainly likely reason stemmed essentially nature our national government. Nation established Constitution, each surrendered only part sovereign power But those powers were retained unless restrained 'the supreme Law Land' expressed laws, treaties States, exercise saw fit. One reserved maintenance judicial systems controversies. Many Framers Constitution felt separate unnecessary entrusted both rights. Others complete system take care problems should itself. This resulted compromise. 'supreme Court' created given create courts. first exercised trial appellate limited jurisdiction Judiciary 1789, 73. 7 lower 1789 they review directly cases such since Only direct decisions Thus beginning country systems. Each proceeds independently ultimate raised system. Understandably dual bound lead conflicts frictions. Litigants who foresaw possibility more favorable treatment predictably hasten invoke whichever believed present best chance success. Obviously function if fight control particular case. Thus, order make work prevent needless friction between courts,' Oklahoma Packing Gas & Electric 309 4, 60 215, 218, 84 L.Ed. 537 (1940), out lines demarcation Some limits spelled Act. added statutes well decisions. 1793 least response pressures. 8 On face absolute enjoining proceedings, falls within three specifically defined exceptions. respondents here intimated establishes 'principles comity,' binding rule argument implies circumstances even cannot accept contention. 1955 when interpreted stated: 'This conveying broad appropriate ad hoc application. Legislative clearcut qualified exceptions.' Amalgamated Clothing Workers Richman Bros., 348 511, 515 516, 75 452, 455, 99 600 (1955). Since time seen fit amend adhere position otherwise equitable principles must based statutory 2283 upheld. Moreover injunctions rests fundamental constitutional independence their enlarged loose construction. Proceedings normally allowed continue unimpaired intervention relief error, any, through ultimately II. 9 Circuit enjoined union's intended picketing, railroad 'from giving availing (itself) benefits order. App. 196. Both sides agree although terms directed court.' It settled evaded addressing parties prohibiting utilization results completed proceeding. (1940); Hill Martin, 296 393, 403, 56 278, 282, 80 293 (1935). upheld, 'expressly Congress,' (the Court's) jurisdiction,' (that court's) 10 Neither party argues express congressional authorization conclusion. does contend order, do alleged basis can supported. 11 protecting clearly expressed, essence appears run follows: sought temporary restraining opposed. course deciding determined could, prior determination, record point unambiguously interpretation 12 initiated suit complaint counts, entirely violations law. counts third violation Interstate Commerce well. prayer picketing. formally served answer, appeared hearing argued issuance labor FEC, exhausted administrative remedies required thus engage 'self-help,' concerted economic activity. Then activity attempt clarify asked: 'You basing your solely Norris-LaGuardia Act?' lawyer replied: 'Right. N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions argument, here.' 63. At during entire side refer law, effects law possible preclusion result overriding day entered denying relevant included conclusions law: 13 '3. BLE-FEC 'major dispute,' having procedures 151, now self-help. 14 '4. conduct FEC pickets responding employees FEC-BLE major dispute. 15 '7. 29 101, Clayton 52, applicable defendants involved.' 67. 16 asserts determination 'free self-help' invoked negate right. railroad, hand, merely large because 47 70, 101 seq. disputes. Based entered, inclined believe determine whether precluded Not never court, language necessarily question. short feel far concerned. different precludes regulation well, latter essential prerequisite upholding 1969 Finally highly unlikely brief statements conceal disputed divide 4-to-3 vote supra, opinions totaling pages. writing sometimes thought cryptic tightly packed, contention stretches content words beyond reasonableness. 17 Any lingering doubts might references positions adopted litigation. railroad's request referred litigation, noted dispute', covered 20 38 738, 52 '(l)abor 'immunized trade activities.' Hutcheson, 312 219, pages 235—236 (61 463, 467—468, 85 788).'4 Record 105. appear argue already 18 Similarly indicate resort tried controlling 'decision squarely Yard) identical material respects.' 123; see also id., 149—176. again mentioned self-help, held respect what situation. controlling, agreed.5 19 Our reading altered entered. said: 'In Order April 26, found Plaintiff's area question, 'is integral (Florida East Company's) operations.' furthermore Defendants herein 'are self-help.' force, effectively nullify findings delineation rights parties. categorization Defendants' activities 'secondary' alter affairs. See R. (394 1109), 2283, therefore, deprive enter instance.' 195—196. 21 somewhat ambiguous passage reached light presented union. 'Now, basic finding (of order) self-help permitted Now, Your Honor, point, get question how right, prevented Honor issuing broad, then, right? know, (Jacksonville Terminal) *.' 249. then proceeded revealed proscription circumstances. try argue, do, itself anticipated decison. Rather define scope entitled exercise, so defined. Considered dissenting view 'by implication' decided 'could subverted proceedings.' Post, 299. contrary, read quoted indication accepted amplified amplification, rather than original itself, protection. Such modification earlier another 'judgment' properly proceedings. record, think, conclusively shows neither themselves nor construed construed. convinced Federal decide wrong distinguishing decision. seek simply will support point. B brings us second prong suggested interference, once announced, theory jurisdiction.' Again unclear, go way: acquired over controversy complaint, involved legality indicated legal, interference. For several contention.6 First, inherent ignore limitations interfere invade preempted unmistakably clear. applies regardless controversy, ousted same is. Cf. 519—520, 457—458. conclusion set forth include Second, enough related admittedly something similar concept 'protect judgments. imply some injunctive interfering consideration seriously impair flexibility authority Third, here. asserted defense 375—377, 390, 1113—1115, 1122. probably pendent claims Mine Gibbs, 383 715, 86 1130, 218 (1966), refrain doing leave issue concerning Conversely, tendered restrict grounds alone. England Louisiana Board Medical Examiners, 375 411, 461, 440 (1964). short, concurrent simultaneously pursuing Kline Burke Constr. 260 226, 43 79, 67 226 (1922); cf. Donovan City Dallas, 377 408, 1579, 409 Therefore assumption hinder Nor improper Again, possess whatever sit If adversely affected decision, vindiction ultimately, necessary, if, action, faced threat immediate irreparable injury sufficient justify usual principles, undoubtedly possibly emergency Natural Public Serv. Comm., 294 698, 55 634, 79 1235 (1935); Moscow Fire insurance 308 542, 129, 456 (1939); Robertson KF105 F3 Kirkham, Jurisdiction 441 (R. Wolfson Pacific KF135 P2 Kurland ed. 1951). Unlike Court, potential broader allows correspondingly III 25 easy one. contentions insubstantial. strongly propriety resolved favor permitting proceed orderly fashion finally controversy. explicit wording much, principle leads inevitably vacated. yet final judgment cause remanded conformity opinion. 27 Vacated remanded. MARSHALL took HARLAN, concurring. 30 join understanding retreat Whether controls underlying arise respecting 31 BRENNAN, whom WHITE joins, dissenting. 32 My disagreement relatively narrow disagree much said history policies (1955), improperly asserting procedures. Nevertheless my discretion acted pursuant exception is, 33 pertinent portions ACL's defining BLE's 34 Baltimore O.R.R., 372 284 (83 691, 759) (1963). 35 Firemen Enginemen Ry., (Co.), 346 Reporter, 2nd 673 (5th Cir. 1965). 36 '6. 'economic self-interest' putting stop interchange services daily performed premises plaintiff's facilities, normal, day-to-day operation trains operating strike replacement crews facilities refusing handle making common striking engineers similarly present. R.R., 362 649 Cir.), aff'd, 385 (87 20) (1966). 37 involved. Ry. 1965); Railroad, (1966).' 67—68. thrust Judge's prescribed relation dispute, tactics, exercising engaged enjoin. supported fact relied Ohio 284, 83 759 (1963), available Furthermore, provides activities, including peaceful 'be States.' contrary petitioner's contention, obviously considerably threshold withdrew 39 view, and, implication, find difficult indeed ascribe views says he held, namely, ACL, marching across street render nugatory declaration 40 Moreover, readily apparent viewed his delineating respective parties, particularly, establishing paramount authoritative own Bros. concluding 'in alternatively order: 41 instance. Capital Service, Incorporated NLRB, 347 501 (74 699, 98 887) (1954); (United Indus. Seafarers international Union) Trustees Galveston Wharves, 400 320 1968).' 42 reliance 501, 74 887 (1954),1 Union (C.A. 5th 1968), ignored particularly significant, sustained threatened ability judgments effective. matter counsel before understood, bottom intervening cited constituted aspects. seeks bolster orders them 'somewhat ambiguous' referring 1969. place, always sure guide subsequent decree opinion, infrequently happens, others, elaborated counsel. Indeed, occasionally grounded counsel's argument. event, misinterpreted various below confusion theory, strands To sure, contend, merits.2 however, dissolved decree. moving preliminary dated 1967.' 30—31. oral extensively supra. 33—34, 243—245, 247, 253—257, 279—281. A context instructive below. Wharves fully complied provisions but, employer bargain 'major' strike. Meanwhile obtained premises. ordered to, of, Fifth granting ground relating effectuation frustrated Similarly, undermine indicates, persuaded After issued, brought effectiveness adhered enjoined, 499, 505, 508—509. primarily insofar 509—510. essence, correctly Terminal. ibid. 46 consistent foregoing. example, opposing contended previously established, res judicata consequently 104—105. sum, extent interpretive actually orders, 'conclusively order' preclude prohibit (ante, 293) erroneous. And, quite apart anticipation correct us. undeniably clear preserve integrity 48 justifying niggardly construction takes relief. Unquestionably manifests design precipitately controversies However, nonintervention absolute, evinces intent exactly occurred rendered ineffective crippling restrictions today places totally inconsistent plain provision. 49 Accordingly, affirm sustaining benefit instituted merged Seaboard Air form continue, petitioner ACL. There employees. (FEC) cars hauled switched around up yard. picketed yard, encouraging cars. initial development chronicled S. Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express Station Employees, AFL-CIO 384 238, 1420, also, aff'd equally divided 20, 87 (1966); Trainmen, 336 172 1964). historical discussion origin Toucey New York Life 314 118, 129 132, 62 139, 141—143, 100 (1941). Hutcheson deemed violative antitrust purposes only, assume, without deciding, arising need it. event rejecting apply cases, advanced. Service NLRB 10(l) National Relations 160(l). Previously very asked 'unfettered union, write Act.' U.S., 505—506, 703. hardly surprising emphasized authoritatively delineated pre-emption carry weight alternative character

Classification Label: 6