On 6/22/09, Bill O'Connor said:

> Robert Naiman . . . writes:
>
>>  *   *   *
>>  wouldn't a "general strike" be illegal in the U.S.
>> under Taft-Hartley?
>
>  Absolutely illegal in the U.S.

Apart from this being, at best, a theoretical metalegal" but not real-life legal question and from the related fantastical factual premise of the above ruminations (i.e., that it is not culturally/politically unrealistic even in light of presently ongoing circumstances to posit anything close to a general strike in the U.S.), what provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act (whether as originally enacted or as since amended) or, for that matter, anywhere else in U.S. law make a "general strike" as that term is commonly understood "absolutely illegal in the U.S."?


_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to