Court Opinion

ID: 9419573
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 22:50:13.819707+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:19.017457
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Douglas,
concurring.
The intimation that the principle announced in this case serves labor alone and not an employer has been adequately answered in the opinion of the Court in which I join. But the emphasis on such cases as Labor Board v. Virginia Electric & Power Co., 314 U. S. 469, and Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. Labor Board, 319 U. S. 533, to prove that discrimination exists moves me to add these words. Those cases would be relevant here if we were dealing with legislation which regulated the relations between unions and their members. Cf. Steele v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co., ante, p. 192. No one may be required to obtain a license in order to speak. But once he uses the economic power which he has over other men and their jobs to influence their action, he is doing more than exercising the freedom of speech protected by the First Amend*544ment. That is true whether he be an employer or an employee. But as long as he does no more than speak he has the same unfettered right, no matter what side of an issue he espouses.
Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Murphy join in this opinion.