Jump to content

Ohio Adjutant General's Department v. Federal Labor Relations Authority

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ohio Adjutant General's Department v. Federal Labor Relations Authority
Decided May 18, 2023
Full case nameOhio Adjutant General's Department v. Federal Labor Relations Authority
Docket no.21-1454
Citations598 U.S. ___ (more)
Holding
The Federal Labor Relations Authority had jurisdiction over a State National Guard labor dispute because a state National Guard acts as a federal agency for the purpose of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute when it hires and supervises dual-status technicians serving in their civilian role.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas · Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Neil Gorsuch · Brett Kavanaugh
Amy Coney Barrett · Ketanji Brown Jackson
Case opinions
MajorityThomas
DissentAlito, joined by Gorsuch

Ohio Adjutant General's Department v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 598 U.S. ___ (2023), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Federal Labor Relations Authority had jurisdiction over a state National Guard labor dispute because a state National Guard acts as a federal agency for the purpose of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute when it hires and supervises dual-status technicians serving in their civilian role.[1][2]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Ohio Adjutant General's Department v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, No. 21-1454, 598 U.S. ___ (2023).
  2. ^ "Leaving "rare birds" alone". SCOTUSblog. 2023-05-19. Retrieved 2024-11-13.
[edit]
  • Text of Ohio Adjutant General's Department v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, No. 21-1454, 598 U.S. ___ (2023) is available from: Justia

This article incorporates written opinion of a United States federal court. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the text is in the public domain. "[T]he Court is unanimously of opinion that no reporter has or can have any copyright in the written opinions delivered by this Court." Wheaton v. Peters, 33 U.S. (8 Pet.) 591, 668 (1834)