Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
American Newspaper Publishers Association v. National Labor Relations Board, 1952 — 344 U.S. 812 · caselaw · US
General
American Newspaper Publishers Association v. National Labor Relations Board
344 U.S. 812·Supreme Court of the United States·1952
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 53.
American Newspaper Publishers Association v. National Labor Relations Board.
Elisha Hanson, William K. Van Allen and Arthur B. Hanson for petitioner.
Solicitor General Perlman, George J. Bott, David P. Findling, Mozart G. Ratner and Bernard Dunau filed a memorandum for respondent, stating that counsel do not oppose the grant of the petition limited to the question of the interpretation of § 8 (b) (6) of the National Labor Relations Act.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari granted limited to question No. 2 presented by the petition for the writ, i. e.:
“Whether the demand and insistence of the International Typographical Union that publishers pay employees in their composing rooms for setting ‘bogus’ violated Section 8 (b)(6) of the National Labor Relations Act in view of the fact that composing room employees perform no service incident or essential to the production of a newspaper in their handling of such ‘bogused’ material.”