Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. v. Florida Gulf Coast Building & Construction Trades Council

Background

A union distributed handbills at the entrances to a Tampa shopping mall asking customers not to shop at any stores until the mall owner promised to use contractors who paid fair wages. The union’s dispute was with a construction contractor working for a department store in the mall; the mall owner and other tenants had no contractual role in choosing that contractor. The handbills were peaceful, distributed for about three weeks, and explicitly disclaimed any attempt to induce strikes or deliveries to stop.

Reasoning

The Court examined whether a federal labor-law provision that bans threats, coercion, or restraint could be read to forbid peaceful handbilling that urges a consumer boycott of neutral businesses. Applying precedent that avoids constitutional confrontations when a statute can be read another way, the Court concluded the law can be interpreted not to reach nonpicketing publicity like these handbills. The Court relied on prior decisions and legislative history showing Congress had focused on picketing and coercive conduct, not peaceful appeals to customers, and therefore no constitutional question needed resolution.

Real world impact

The ruling means the Board’s order against the union was not enforced, and peaceful handbilling urging consumers not to patronize mall stores cannot automatically be treated as coercion under that provision. Unions, mall owners, retailers, and the labor board will read this decision as limiting enforcement against nonpicketing consumer appeals. The decision avoids deciding whether such handbills are fully protected by the First Amendment.

Dissents or concurrances

Two Justices agreed with the judgment; one Justice did not participate in the decision.