Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney
Holding
When considering the National Labor Relations Board's request for a preliminary injunction under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act, district courts must apply the traditional four factors articulated in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
Judgment
Vacated and remanded, 8-1, in an opinion by Clarence Thomas on Jun 13, 2024. Justice Jackson filed an opinion concurring in part, dissenting in part, and concurring in the judgment.
Oct 3, 2023Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 6, 2023)Oct 13, 2023Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 6, 2023 to December 6, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
Oct 16, 2023Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 6, 2023.
Nov 6, 2023Brief amici curiae of The Chamber of Commerce of the United States, et al. filed.Nov 6, 2023Brief amicus curiae of New Civil Liberties Alliance filed.Nov 6, 2023Brief amici curiae of Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, et al. filed.Dec 6, 2023Brief of respondent M. Kathleen McKinney, Regional Director of Region 15 of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on Behalf of the National Labor Relations Board in opposition filed.Dec 20, 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2024.
Dec 20, 2023Reply of petitioner Starbucks Corporation filed. (Distributed)Jan 8, 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/12/2024.
Jan 12, 2024Petition GRANTED.
Feb 8, 2024Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Starbucks Corporation.Feb 16, 2024SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, April 23, 2024.
Feb 20, 2024Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.
Feb 21, 2024Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Feb 21, 2024Brief of petitioner Starbucks Corporation filed.Feb 22, 2024Record received from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The record is electronic and is available on PACER.
Feb 27, 2024Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.Feb 28, 2024Brief amici curiae of Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, et al. filed.Feb 28, 2024Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.Feb 28, 2024Brief amicus curiae of National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed.Feb 28, 2024Brief amicus curiae of New Civil Liberties Alliance filed.Feb 28, 2024Brief amici curiae of State of Tennessee and Twenty Other States filed.Feb 28, 2024Brief amicus curiae of Buckeye Institute filed.Mar 22, 2024Brief of respondent Kathleen McKinney, Regional Director of Region 15 of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on Behalf of the National Labor Relations Board filed.Mar 27, 2024CIRCULATED
Mar 28, 2024Brief amicus curiae of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) filed. (Distributed)Mar 28, 2024Brief amici curiae of Starbucks Workers filed. (Distributed)Mar 28, 2024Brief amici curiae of American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) filed. (Distributed)Mar 29, 2024Brief amici curiae of Remedies Scholars filed. (Distributed)Mar 29, 2024Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed. (Distributed)Mar 29, 2024Brief amici curiae of Labor and Employment Law Professors filed. (Distributed)Apr 12, 2024Reply of petitioner Starbucks Corporation filed. (Distributed)Apr 23, 2024Argued. For petitioner: Lisa S. Blatt, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Austin Raynor, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
Jun 13, 2024Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed an opinion concurring in part, dissenting in part, and concurring in the judgment.
Jul 15, 2024Judgment Issued.Recommended Citation: Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/starbucks-corp-v-mckinney/