In the United States Supreme Court case of United Mine Workers of America et al. v. Coronado Coal Company et al., 1921, the court ruled that a labor union could be sued under antitrust laws for damages resulting from secondary boycotts and strikes aimed at disrupting interstate commerce. The Coronado Coal Company brought suit against the United Mine Workers (UMW) after they organized a strike in Arkansas which resulted in violence and property damage to non-union mines owned by Coronado. The UMW argued that their activities were protected by labor exemptions to antitrust law, but this was rejected by the court who found them liable for triple damages as stipulated under federal law for violations of anti-trust legislation.

The dissenting opinion in the United States Supreme Court case of United Mine Workers of America et al. v. Coronado Coal Company et al., 1921, argued that the majority's decision to hold a union liable for damages caused by its members during a strike was fundamentally flawed and set a dangerous precedent. The dissenters believed that unions should not be held responsible for individual actions taken by their members without explicit endorsement or direction from the union itself. They contended that this ruling could potentially stifle labor movements and infringe upon workers' rights to organize and protest against unfair working conditions or wages, as it would put unions at risk of being financially crippled by lawsuits over actions they did not directly control or endorse. Furthermore, they expressed concerns about how such liability might extend beyond unions to other organizations like political parties or religious groups if their members committed illegal acts while participating in activities related to those groups.