October Term 2009 · Docket 08-604
Can a railroad board ignore a required conference?
Union Pacific disputes a board award that ignored a statutory conference requirement.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Ballenger cited Section 3 First (q) of the Railway Labor Act.
Ballenger noted the statute requires a conference under Section 2 Second.
Geoghegan corrected a pronunciation during the oral argument.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 11-39 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 11-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 27-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 27-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-45 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 41-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 41-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-5
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests whether a labor board must hold a conference before issuing an award.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-45 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-45
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 7, 2009.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 25-27
What each side wants
Union Pacific wants the board award set aside for ignoring the conference rule.
The union wants the board award upheld despite the missing conference.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-45 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-45
What each side says
Union Pacific argues the statute mandates a conference before an award.
The union argues the board can excuse the missing conference under the law.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-45 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-45
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if some panels stay proceedings to allow conferences.
Justice Sotomayor asked why the statutory violation is not the main issue.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 11-39 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 11-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 27-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 27-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 41-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 41-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-5
Why it matters
This case defines the procedural limits of labor boards in railroad disputes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-45 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-45
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 11-39 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 11-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 27-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 27-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-47 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 41-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 41-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-5
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-45 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 49-45 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 49-45
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.