In 1935, Congress passed the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which among other things guaranteed workers
the
right to join a labor union and collectively bargain with employers. The law also established the National Labor
Relations
Board (NLRB), an independent agency responsible for enforcing the law.
The Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation fired ten workers attempting to unionize its plant located in Aliquippa,
Pennsylvania. When the National Labor Relations Board determined this to be in violation of the recently passed
NLRA,
the company sued claiming that labor relations had only an indirect effect on commerce, and thus Congress did not
have
the constitutional power to regulate it.
In the subsequent case, National Labor Relations Board v. Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation (1937), the
Supreme
Court ruled in favor of the National Labor Relations Board by a 5-4 vote, holding that the Jones and Laughlin Steel
Corporation conducted interstate commerce and that industrial labor relations affects that commerce.
(A) Identify the constitutional clause that is common in both United States v. Lopez (1995) and National Labor
Relations Board v. Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation (1937).
(B) Explain how the facts in United States v. Lopez led to a different holding than in National Labor Relations
Board v. Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation.
(C) Explain how the holding in National Labor Relations Board v. Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation affected
the balance of power between the states and the national government.
