InsideGov
Supreme Court · Decisions

System Federation No. 91, Railway Employes' Department, AFL-CIO, et al. v. Wright et al.

364 U.S. 642 · No. 48 · 1960 term · Warren Court

Decided Jan 16, 1961 · argued Dec 5, 1960

Unions · Union or closed shop: includes agency shop litigation

Majority opinion: John Harlan

The voteMajorityDissent

5–35 in the majority, 3 in dissent

3 dissents (6–3)

Reversed and remanded. System Federation No. 91, Railway Employes' Department, AFL-CIO, et al. won.

What this ruling means

Reversed and remanded: the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit and sent the case back to that court for further proceedings that follow the Supreme Court’s ruling.

System Federation No. 91, Railway Employes' Department, AFL-CIO, et al. was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Won” means the Court gave that side the result it asked for.

From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.

Report a correction

Summary

The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.

Wikipedia has no article on this case, so there is no summary.

Data notes

The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.

Report a correction

How the justices voted

Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1960 term. Filled: the 5 in the majority. Hollow: the 3 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.

More liberalMore conservativeMedianDouglasBlackWarrenBrennanClarkWhittakerFrankfurterHarlan

Majority(5)

Dissent(3)

Did not take part: Potter Stewart.

Data notes

Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.

Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.

Report a correction

The parties

Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.

Petitioner
System Federation No. 91, Railway Employes' Department, AFL-CIO, et al.Employee, or job applicant
Respondent
Wright et al.Union, labor organization, or official
Reached the Court by
Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
Data notes

The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.

Report a correction

The law at issue

The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.

Provision
Railway Labor
Kind of law
Federal Statute
Decided by
Statutory construction; Supreme Court supervision of lower federal or state courts or original jurisdiction
Data notes

The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.

Report a correction

Timeline

What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.

  1. Jan 16, 1961DecidedDecided · Decided 5–3: reversed and remanded. System Federation No. 91, Railway Employes' Department, AFL-CIO, et al. won.
  2. Dec 5, 1960ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
  3. Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari).
  4. Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit: affirmed.
  5. Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the Kentucky Western U.S. District Court.
Data notes

From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.

Report a correction

Other decisions on the same issue

22 other argued cases since 1946 on union or closed shop: includes agency shop litigation, newest first.

  1. Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31Landmark · Freedom of speech and of the press138 S. Ct. 2448Jun 27, 2018 · 138 S. Ct. 2448Unions5–45–4 band

  2. Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association578 U.S. 1Mar 29, 2016 · 578 U.S. 1Unions4–45–4 band

  3. Daniel B. Locke, et al. v. Edward A. Karass, State Controller, et al.555 U.S. 207Jan 21, 2009 · 555 U.S. 207Unions9–0Unanimous band

  4. Gary Davenport, et al. v. Washington Education Association551 U.S. 177Jun 14, 2007 · 551 U.S. 177Unions9–0Unanimous band

  5. Naomi Marquez v. Screen Actors Guild, Inc., et al.525 U.S. 33Nov 3, 1998 · 525 U.S. 33Unions9–0Unanimous band
  6. James P. Lehnert et al. v. Ferris Faculty Association et al.500 U.S. 507May 30, 1991 · 500 U.S. 507Unions5–45–4 band
  7. Communications Workers of America et al. v. Beck et al.487 U.S. 735Jun 29, 1988 · 487 U.S. 735Unions5–36–3 band
  8. Chicago Teachers Union, Local No. 1, Aft, AFL-CIO, et al. v. Hudson et al.475 U.S. 292Feb 26, 1986 · 475 U.S. 292Unions9–0Unanimous band
  9. Ellis et al. v. Brotherhood of Railway, Airline & Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express & Station Employes et al.466 U.S. 435Apr 25, 1984 · 466 U.S. 435Unions8–18–1 band
  10. Abood et al. v. Detroit Board of Education et al.431 U.S. 209May 23, 1977 · 431 U.S. 209Unions9–0Unanimous band

  11. Retail Clerks International Association, Local 1625, AFL-CIO, et al. v. Schermerhorn et al.373 U.S. 746Jun 3, 1963 · 373 U.S. 746Unions8–0Unanimous band
  12. National Labor Relations Board v. News Syndicate Co., Inc., et al.365 U.S. 695Apr 17, 1961 · 365 U.S. 695Unions6–27–2 band
  13. Local 357, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, v. National Labor Relations Board365 U.S. 667Apr 17, 1961 · 365 U.S. 667Unions6–27–2 band
  14. Local 60, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, et al. v. National Labor Relations Board365 U.S. 651Apr 17, 1961 · 365 U.S. 651Unions7–18–1 band
  15. Local Lodge No. 1424, International Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, et al. v. National Labor Relations Board362 U.S. 411Apr 25, 1960 · 362 U.S. 411Unions7–27–2 band
  16. Felter v. Southern Pacific Co. et al.359 U.S. 326Apr 27, 1959 · 359 U.S. 326Unions6–36–3 band
  17. Pennsylvania Railroad Co. et al. v. Rychlik352 U.S. 480Feb 25, 1957 · 352 U.S. 480Unions8–0Unanimous band
  18. Railway Employes' Department, American Federation of Labor, et al. v. Hanson et al.351 U.S. 225May 21, 1956 · 351 U.S. 225Unions9–0Unanimous band
  19. Local Union No. 10, United Association of Journeymen Plumbers & Steamfitters, et al. v. Graham et al., Trading As Graham Brothers345 U.S. 192Mar 16, 1953 · 345 U.S. 192Unions7–27–2 band
  20. Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.338 U.S. 355Dec 5, 1949 · 338 U.S. 355Unions6–27–2 band
  21. American Federation of Labor et al. v. American Sash & Door Co. et al.335 U.S. 538Jan 3, 1949 · 335 U.S. 538Unions8–18–1 band

  22. Lincoln Federal Labor Union et al. v. Northwestern Iron & Metal Co. et al.335 U.S. 525Jan 3, 1949 · 335 U.S. 525Unions9–0Unanimous band
Data notes

Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.

Report a correction

Official record

Read the full opinion on Justia and the argument audio on Oyez. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.