state–both right–to–work States and unionized States–to attract businesses and promote new job growth." The States further argue that "Contrary to General Counsel’s apparent position, federal labor law neither favors nor disfavors states based on whether they have right-to-work laws. The Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 guaranteed the National Labor Relations Act would never be construed to undermine or interfere with each State’s authority to enact and enforce right-to-work laws."
There is no cost for South Dakota to join and provide assistance with this Amicus or "Friend of the Court" filing.
This is not the first time that the South Dakota Attorney General has been required to address the actions of the NLRB this year. In January of 2011, the NLRB threatened to sue South Dakota, South Carolina, Arizona and Utah over recently approved State Constitutional Amendments guaranteeing the right to a secret ballot. In a joint letter dated March 4, 2011, the Attorneys General of these states emphasized their position that State Constitutional Amendments guaranteeing their electorate the right to a secret ballot are consistent with existing federal law, and therefore the NLRB’s threatened federal litigation against the States was unwarranted. The NLRB has sued the State of Arizona over the secret ballot issue, and continues to threaten suit against South Dakota absent the Attorney General entering into a stipulation concerning the unconstitutionality of the State Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing the right to a secret ballot.
"The NLRB’s continued and unprecedented action against the States, private businesses, and our citizens has gone too far," stated Attorney General Jackley. "We are now asking to place necessary limits upon the actions of this federal agency which is currently not being held directly or indirectly accountable."
