‘I’ll Take That As A Compliment’: Justice Kagan Shares Laugh With Lawyer During Starbucks Union Case
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00So when you said the normal process, so it's just a traditional four-factor test applied normally
00:07That's what you want. Yes. I hope I didn't that's not a trick question. Yeah, no
00:14It's it's supposed to be a clarifying question
00:18Yeah, four factors with no deference and to please make sure maybe I'll take that as a compliment
00:24that you think I'm that crafty, but really I
00:27I
00:28think we definitely need a reversal with the four answers and and just on on the
00:35On this on the irreparable harm part you say in your reply brief that under that four-factor test applied normally
00:44The court is supposed to decide whether delay is going to frustrate
00:47I'm using your words frustrate the board's ability to remedy the alleged unfair labor practices
00:52So you have no problem with that right as long as it's it's actually irreparable like there's some so let me just see if
00:58I can try to be very you know help here chill
01:01Can't be chill can be irreparable, but it has to be chilled from something
01:05That's about to happen an event that can't be unscrambled and so when we talk about the board's remedial factors
01:10It can't be faith in workplace democracy. It has to be there's there's an event
01:14There's an election that they've actually you know barricaded the store and employees can't get in to vote unless we get this injunction
01:20You can't recreate the condition, so that's all we're talking about and there the board's remedial power is being frustrated
01:27And there's a reputable harm, but all the more reason you've you know balance of the equities
01:31It may be that the employer had to shut down the store because it's not making money and on the equities and the public interest
01:37I mean, I think also in your brief you acknowledged that when
01:42the
01:44Statute like this is involved and public interests are involved a court is supposed to take that into account in a way
01:50That's different from what it might in a statute between private parties
01:54Excuse me in a case between private parties with only private interests
01:58I think that's correct because by definition the public interest is broader than a breach of contract
02:03And if you have you know the environment or or I don't know voting rights
02:08There's public interest, but the case that this originates and in the Oakland Cannabis in the Virginia railway
02:13It's public interest has deliberately expressed in legislation
02:16So where the court has been on public interest is saying district courts can't reach out
02:20The confines of the statute either in going too far or too little and that's that I think does go to public interest
02:27But I do think our point is this public interest wasn't even
02:31referenced below except for the district court saying there's a public interest in the statute is that if there's not
02:38Showing under all three factors the public interest is not served by you know putting a scarlet letter on an employer and having them just
02:45Live under injunction that they violated the act based on a non-frivolous legal theory
02:49With not even their side of the evidence being heard that is very damaging to the public interest