Monday, November 2, 2009

Supreme Court Grants Cert in Two-Member NLRB Case

NLRB It finally happened--the Supreme Court just granted cert in NLRB v. New Process Steel.  That's one of the cases addressing the legality of two-member NLRB decisions (New Process was the Seventh Circuit case upholding those decisions).  You can start with this link and work backward to follow our coverage of the issue up to this point.

My prediction?  The NLRB loses, although its efforts to keep working and the fact that hundreds of decisions get vacated elicits some sympathetic comments.

Hat Tip:  Justin Keith & Dennis Walsh

-JH

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/laborprof_blog/2009/11/supreme-court-grants-cert-in-twomember-nlrb-case.html

Labor Law | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0120a64ab0cb970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Supreme Court Grants Cert in Two-Member NLRB Case:

» Supremes Grant Cert In 2 Member NLRB Case from Adjunct Law Prof Blog
The Supreme Court just granted cert in NLRB v. New Process Steel. In that case, the 7th upheld the authority of the NLRB to issue 2 Member decisions.You can follow our coverage here. There have been hundreds and hundreds of... [Read More]

Tracked on Nov 3, 2009 4:54:20 AM

Comments

Jeff, your optimism is so reassuring.

Posted by: Dennis Walsh | Nov 2, 2009 8:41:36 AM

I know, Dennis. I actually hope the NLRB wins, as I admire what Liebman and Schaumber have been doing. But my reading of Section 3(b) leans towards the D.C. Circuit's interpretation in Laurel Baye.

Posted by: Jeff | Nov 2, 2009 9:37:00 AM

I think what is most interesting at this point is that the Supreme Court granted cert in the 7th Cir. case both because: (1) it upheld the NLRB two-member board decisions; and (2) it appears to be a slap in the face to the D.C. Cir. which is supposed to be the admin law court with the most expertise in labor law (see Harry Edwards, etc.) and that court in Laurel Baye of course struck down the two-member decisions.

Posted by: Paul | Nov 2, 2009 12:25:30 PM

I wonder if cert was granted in New Process and not Laurel Baye simply because both parties asked for review in New Process?

Posted by: Jeff Wilson | Nov 3, 2009 6:18:16 AM

Do you think part of what the Supreme Court is doing here is putting pressure on the Senate & President? By taking cert., they could be saying, "Don't expect us to sit back and just let you all keep dithering. Even if two is okay, it's far from ideal, so get moving!" Or maybe that's just my own interpretation.

Posted by: Matt Bodie | Nov 3, 2009 9:00:15 AM

Post a comment