October Term 2022 · Docket 21-1449

Can strikers destroy perishable goods during a work stoppage?

Glacier Northwest claims the union destroyed cement. The union argues the strike was protected.

Official caption
Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. Int'l Brotherhood of Teamsters
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Decided
Sources analyzed through
Post Opinion

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  3. — An official Court opinion 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.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Glacier argues intentional destruction is not protected activity.

    The union argues strikers only need reasonable precautions.

    questions

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests the limit of protected labor activity. Strikers may stop work but not destroy property.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 10, 2023.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Glacier wants the union to pay for destroyed cement.

The union wants the strike to remain protected.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Glacier argues intentional destruction is never protected activity.

The union argues strikers only need reasonable precautions.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked how to distinguish this from other strikes.

Justice Thomas asked why a jurisdictional hiatus is inadequate.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the boundary between lawful strikes and property damage. It determines when workers lose legal protection for their actions.

Official sources for this section

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 Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Verified official opinions and orders

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON