|New Negro Alliance et al. v. Sanitary Grocery Co.|
|Argued March 2–3, 1938|
Decided March 28, 1938
|Full case name||New Negro Alliance et al. v Sanitary Grocery Co., Inc.|
|Citations||303 U.S. 552 ( more)|
|Prior history||92 F.2d 510 ( D.C. Cir. 1937)|
|Subsequent history||As amended by order of April 25, 1938, see 304 U.S.|
|It was intended by the Congress that peaceful and orderly dissemination of information by those defined as persons interested in a labor dispute concerning 'terms and conditions of employment' in an industry or a plant or a place of business should be lawful.|
|Majority||Roberts, joined by Hughes, Brandeis, Stone, Black, Reed|
|Dissent||McReynolds, joined by Butler|
|Cardozo took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.|
|Norris-LaGuardia Act sect. 13a|
New Negro Alliance v. Sanitary Grocery Co., 303 U.S. 552 (1938) was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision, which affects US labor law, safeguarding a right to boycott and in the struggle by African Americans against discriminatory hiring practices. Sanitary Grocery Co. was at the time of the case owned by Safeway Inc.
"An association of Negroes, organized for the mutual improvement of its members and the promotion of civic, educational, benevolent, and charitable enterprises, requested a Grocery Company to adopt a policy of employing Negro clerks, in the course of personnel changes, in certain stores of the company patronized largely by colored people but in which no colored clerks were employed. The request was ignored, whereupon the organization caused a picket, bearing a placard reading "Do Your Part! Buy Where You Work! No Negroes Employed Here," to patrol in front of one of the stores, on one day, and caused, or threatened to cause, a similar patrol of two other stores." 
The court concluded that according to the United States Congress "peaceful and orderly dissemination of information by those defined as persons interested in a labor dispute concerning 'terms and conditions of employment' in an industry or a plant or a place of business should be lawful; that, short of fraud, breach of the peace, violence, or conduct otherwise unlawful, those having a direct or indirect interest in such terms and conditions of employment should be at liberty to advertise and disseminate facts and information with respect to terms and conditions of employment, and peacefully to persuade others to concur in their views respecting an employer's practices." 
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (August 2016)
- "New Negro Alliance v. Sanitary Grocery Co., 303 U.S. 552 (1938)". Justia Law. Retrieved 27 July 2018. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
- "New Negro Alliance et al. v. Sanitary Grocery Co". FindLaw. Retrieved 28 December 2015. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
- Works related to New Negro Alliance v. Sanitary Grocery Company at Wikisource
- Text of New Negro Alliance v. Sanitary Grocery Co., 303 U.S. 552 (1938) is available from: CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia
- New Negro Alliance's Sanitary Grocery Protest Site
|This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.|