New Process Steel v. National Labor Relations Board

Holding: Because of gridlock over presidential confirmations, the National Labor Relations Board only operated with two of its five seats filled. The Court held that it was illegal for NLRB to rule on cases with only two sitting members.

Judgment: Reversed and Remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice John Paul Stevens on June 17, 2010. Justice Kennedy dissented, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

• Panel of two is not sufficient for NLRB authority (Kimberly Harding - Guest)
• Fall-out from today's decision in New Process Steel (Kevin Russell)
• New question in NLRB case (Lyle Denniston)
• Discussion of vacancy requirements attracts Court's interest (Erin Miller)
• Identifying quorum requirements for the National Labor Relations Board (Anna Christensen)

Briefs and Documents

Merits Briefs

• Brief for Petitioner New Process Steel, LP
• Brief for Respondent National Labor Relations Board
• Reply Brief for Petitioner New Process Steel, L.P.
• Supplemental Letter Brief for the Petitioner
• Supplemental Letter Brief for the Respondent

Amicus Briefs

• Brief for the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America in Support of Petitioner
• Brief for the the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations in Support of Respondent

Order Requesting New Briefs

Order (April 16, 2010)

Certiorari-stage documents

• Opinion below (7th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Amicus brief of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce