SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
Appeal under the Criminal Appeals Act from a judgment quashing an indictment under the Sherman Act
No. 43. Argued December 19, 1940 – Decided February 3, 1941
1. In determining whether trade union conduct violates the
Sherman Act, that Act should be read with § 20 of the Clayton Act and with the
Norris-LaGuardia Act. P. 231.
2. Labor union activities enumerated in § 20 of the Clayton Act, which that
section declares shall not be "considered or held to be violations of any
law of the United States," are not punishable as criminal under the Sherman
Act. P. 232.
3. Section 20 of the Clayton Act does not differentiate between trade union
conduct directed against an employer because of a controversy arising in the
relation between employer and employee, as such, and conduct similarly directed
but arising from a struggle between two unions seeking the favor of the same
employer. P. 232.
4. In a case involving interstate commerce, union carpenters refused to work for
a brewing company by which they were employed, or on construction work being
done for it and for its adjoining tenant; they attempted to persuade members of
other unions similarly to refuse to work; they picketed the brewer's premises,
displaying signs "Unfair to Organized Labor"; and they recommended to
the union members and their friends not to buy or use the brewer's product.
Held:
(1) That these actions were protected from prosecution under the Sherman Act by
§ 20 of the Clayton Act, construed in the light of Congress's definition of a
"labor dispute" in the Norris-LaGuardia Act. P. 233.
(2) In view of the broad definition of "labor dispute" in the
Norris-LaGuardia Act, § 20 of the Clayton Act gives protection to the conduct
it describes although directed in part against outsiders to the labor dispute. Duplex
Printing Press Co. v. Deering, 254 U.S. 443, is inapplicable. P. 234.
32 F.Supp. 600, affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court.