Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 Et Al. v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc., Et Al.

• 1967 • 391 U.S. 308 • Warren Court
In the case of Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 et al. v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc., et al., in 1967, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a shopping center could not prohibit peaceful picketing by union members on its property. The dispute arose when employees of a supermarket located within the shopping plaza protested against non-unionized labor practices and were subsequently barred from demonstrating within the premises by Logan Valley Plaza management citing trespassing laws. The...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Warren Court
Term: 1967
Docket: 478
391 U.S. 308
88 S. Ct. 1601
20 L. Ed. 2d 603
1968 U.S. LEXIS 2996
Argued: Mar 14, 1968

Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 Et Al. v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc., Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 et al. v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc., et al., in 1967, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a shopping center could not prohibit peaceful picketing by union members on its property. The dispute arose when employees of a supermarket located within the shopping plaza protested against non-unionized labor practices and were subsequently barred from demonstrating within the premises by Logan Valley Plaza management citing trespassing laws. The court held that such prohibition violated their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and assembly as it was deemed an equivalent public forum despite being privately owned due to its open invitation for public patronage and use. This landmark decision expanded constitutional protections into private spaces used for public purposes but has since been limited by subsequent rulings.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

The dissenting opinion in the case of Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 et al. v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc., et al., argued that the majority's decision to allow union picketing on private property was a violation of the property owner's rights and an overextension of First Amendment protections. The dissenters contended that while freedom of speech is vital, it does not grant unlimited access to all venues for expression - particularly when those venues are privately owned properties where business operations could be disrupted by such activities. They also pointed out inconsistencies with previous court rulings which had upheld restrictions on picketing in similar contexts, arguing this represented an unjustified departure from established legal precedent.

Opinion written by Justice TMarshall
Decided: May 20, 1968
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms