Atlantic Coast Line R. v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen
Headline: Court conditionally reinstates a district-court limited preliminary injunction, requiring a petition for Supreme Court review by June 11, 1966, and leaving the injunction in place while review proceeds.
Holding: The Court granted a conditional reinstatement of a limited preliminary injunction, effective if a petition for writ of certiorari is filed by June 11, 1966, and remaining in effect while the Court reviews the petition.
- Keeps the district court injunction in force while Supreme Court review is sought.
- Requires filing a petition by June 11, 1966, or the reinstatement will not take effect.
- Ends reinstatement automatically if the Supreme Court declines review; stays if review is granted.
Summary
Background
A group asked the Justices to reinstate a limited preliminary injunction that a federal district court in the Middle District of Florida had issued. The application was presented to Justice Black and then referred to the full Court. Lawyers for the applicants and for the opposing side are named in the record, and one Justice did not take part in the decision.
Reasoning
The Court addressed whether the injunction should be put back into effect and under what conditions. The Court granted reinstatement on the condition that a petition asking the Court to review the case be filed by June 11, 1966, and that any brief opposing that petition be filed by June 16, 1966. The order explains that the reinstatement becomes effective if the petition is timely filed, and it remains in force while the Court decides whether to take the case. The Court also allowed the filing papers to be typewritten.
Real world impact
Practically, the order gives the party that sought the injunction temporary protection while they seek review from the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court denies the petition, the reinstatement ends automatically. If the Court grants the petition, the injunction stays in effect until the Court issues its final judgment. These deadlines and conditions shape how quickly the parties must act.
Dissents or concurrances
The record notes that the Chief Justice, Justice Black, and Justice White believed the relief should be denied, and that Justice Fortas did not take part. This disagreement is noted in the order.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?