Gompers v. Buck’s Stove and Range Co
**Overview of Gompers v. Buck’s Stove and Range Co.**
Gompers v. Buck’s Stove and Range Co. is a significant Supreme Court case from the early 20th century that addresses the tensions between labor unions and employers. The case arose when the American Federation of Labor (AFL) organized a boycott against Buck's Stove and Range Company in support of striking employees. In response, the company obtained an injunction against the boycott and sought to hold union leaders in criminal contempt for publishing the company's name as part of their protest. The Supreme Court ultimately reversed this contempt citation on procedural grounds. However, the Court's opinion, delivered by Justice Joseph R. Lamar, underscored a notable judicial stance favoring the rights of employers over labor unions. The ruling indicated limitations on the unions' claims regarding freedom of speech, particularly concerning their public listings of companies deemed to engage in unfair practices. This case reflects the broader historical context of labor relations in the United States during the early 20th century, illustrating the challenges faced by labor movements in their pursuit of rights and recognition.
Gompers v. Buck’s Stove and Range Co.
Date: May 15, 1911
Citation: 221 U.S. 418
Issues: Freedom of speech; labor
Significance: Although the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of union leaders on criminal contempt, it clearly indicated the Court’s lack of support for labor unions.
The American Federation of Labor (AFL) supported the striking employees of Buck’s Stove and Range Company by organizing a boycott of the manufacturer’s products. The company got an injunction against the boycott, and the union planned an appeal. The AFL published the company’s name on a list of companies engaging in unfair practices, and the company responded by seeking to cite the union leaders with criminal contempt. The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the criminal contempt citation on a technicality. However, in his opinion for the Court, Justice Joseph R. Lamar rejected the union’s claim that its publication of the list was a legitimate exercise of free speech and strongly indicated the Court’s support for the rights of employers against labor unions.
