Court Opinion

ID: 9432465
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:35:24.490177+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:07:18.618103
License: Public Domain

Justice Stevens,
dissenting.
For the first two reasons stated in Justice White’s opinion, ante, at 541-545, I would affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals enforcing the Board’s order. I agree with Justice White that the Court’s strict construction of NLRB v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 351 U. S. 105 (1956), is not consistent with Hudgens v. NLRB, 424 U. S. 507 (1976), and our other cases interpreting Babcock. I do not, however, join his opinion to the extent that it suggests that the Bab-cock case was incorrectly decided, ante, at 545-548. That decision rejected the Board’s view that the rules applicable to union organizing draw no distinction between employees and nonemployees. I believe that central holding in Bab-cock was correct and is not inconsistent with the current law of deference to administrative agencies. Accordingly, I also respectfully dissent.