Court Opinion

ID: 9506379
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 20:57:47.475549+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:53.232588
License: Public Domain

CALLAHAN, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I agree with the majority that the district court abused its discretion in concluding that Appellants were unlikely to suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction. I dissent, however, from the remainder of the majority’s decision. I would hold that the district court acted within its discretion in determining that Appellants failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits.
The majority’s conclusion is based on its finding that the union rules Appellants were disciplined for violating were not established at the time the phone bank was conducted. However, members and officials of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters (“UBC”), as well as the UBC’s national appeals committee, consistently determined Appellants’ conduct violated the UBC constitution. The UBC’s construction of its own constitution is entitled to broad deference to avoid unnecessary interference in its internal affairs. Local 1052 of United Broth. of Carpenters & Joiners v. Los Angeles Cnty. Dist. Council of Carpenters, 944 F.2d 610, 613 (9th Cir.1991). Accordingly, I cannot say that the district court abused its discretion by deferring to that interpretation.