babbitt
farm
workers
argued
february
decided
june
appellees
farmworkers
union
union
agent
farmworkers
union
supporter
brought
suit
federal
district
arizona
seeking
declaration
unconstitutionality
various
provisions
arizona
farm
labor
statute
well
entire
statute
injunction
enforcement
ruled
unconstitutional
various
grounds
provisions
specifying
procedures
election
employee
bargaining
representatives
limiting
union
publicity
directed
consumers
agricultural
products
imposing
criminal
penalty
violations
statute
excusing
agricultural
employer
furnishing
union
materials
information
time
facilities
enable
communicate
employer
employees
access
provision
governing
arbitration
labor
disputes
construed
mandating
compulsory
arbitration
deeming
provisions
inseparable
remainder
statute
went
declare
whole
statute
unconstitutional
enjoined
enforcement
held
challenges
provisions
regulating
election
procedures
consumer
publicity
criminal
sanctions
present
case
controversy
challenges
access
arbitration
provisions
justiciable
pp
fact
appellees
invoked
election
procedures
provision
past
expressed
intention
future
defeat
justiciability
challenge
view
nature
claim
delays
attending
statutory
election
scheme
technical
limitations
may
vote
unit
elections
severely
curtail
freedom
association
await
appellees
participation
election
assist
resolution
threshold
question
whether
election
procedures
subject
scrutiny
first
amendment
question
dispositive
appellees
challenge
warrant
postponing
consideration
election
procedures
claim
pp
respect
appellees
claim
consumer
publicity
provision
face
proscribes
unfair
labor
practice
dishonest
untruthful
deceptive
publicity
unconstitutionally
penalizes
inaccuracies
inadvertently
uttered
appellees
reason
fear
prosecution
violation
provision
state
disavowed
intention
invoking
criminal
penalty
provision
applies
terms
ny
person
violates
provision
statute
unions
commit
unfair
labor
practices
accordingly
positions
parties
sufficiently
adverse
respect
consumer
publicity
provision
present
case
controversy
reasons
case
controversy
also
presented
appellees
claim
provision
unduly
restricts
protected
speech
limiting
publicity
directed
agricultural
products
employer
union
primary
dispute
pp
clear
appellees
desire
engage
prohibited
consumer
publicity
campaigns
claim
criminal
penalty
provision
unconstitutionally
vague
properly
entertained
district
may
raised
appeal
provision
truly
vague
appellees
expected
pursue
collective
activities
peril
appellees
challenge
access
provision
justiciable
conjectural
anticipate
access
denied
importantly
appellees
claim
provision
violates
first
fourteenth
amendments
deprives
state
agency
responsible
enforcing
statute
discretion
compel
agricultural
employers
furnish
enumerated
items
depends
upon
attributes
situs
involved
opinion
constitutionality
provision
time
patently
advisory
adjudication
challenge
must
wait
appellees
assert
interest
seeking
access
particular
facilities
well
palpable
basis
believing
access
refused
pp
similarly
ruling
allegedly
compulsory
arbitration
provision
wholly
advisory
record
discloses
real
concrete
dispute
application
provision
appellees
acknowledging
employers
may
elect
responses
arguably
unlawful
strike
seeking
injunction
agreeing
arbitrate
appellees
never
contested
constitutionality
provision
pp
district
properly
considered
constitutionality
election
procedures
provision
even
though
prior
construction
provision
arizona
state
courts
lacking
abstained
adjudicating
challenges
consumer
publicity
criminal
penalty
provisions
material
unresolved
questions
state
law
determined
arizona
courts
pp
construction
election
procedures
provision
obviate
need
decision
constitutional
issue
materially
alter
question
decided
resolution
question
whether
procedures
affected
first
amendment
interest
dispositive
appellees
challenge
criminal
penalty
provision
might
construed
broadly
applying
provisions
statute
affirmatively
proscribing
commanding
courses
conduct
narrowly
applying
certain
provisions
susceptible
violated
either
case
provision
reasonably
susceptible
constructions
might
undercut
modify
appellees
vagueness
attack
otherwise
significantly
alter
constitutional
questions
requiring
resolution
pp
view
fact
consumer
publicity
provision
patently
ambiguous
subject
varying
interpretations
substantially
affect
constitutional
question
presented
district
erred
entertaining
aspects
appellees
challenge
provision
without
benefit
construction
thereof
arizona
courts
pp
district
erred
invalidating
election
procedures
provision
arizona
constitutionally
obliged
provide
procedures
pursuant
agricultural
employees
chosen
representative
might
compel
employers
negotiate
undertaken
assertedly
niggardly
fashion
presents
general
matter
first
amendment
problems
moreover
statute
preclude
voluntary
recognition
union
agricultural
employer
pp
white
delivered
opinion
burger
stewart
blackmun
powell
rehnquist
stevens
joined
brennan
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
marshall
joined
post
rex
lee
special
assistant
attorney
general
arizona
argued
cause
appellants
briefs
robert
corbin
attorney
general
john
lasota
former
attorney
general
charles
jones
jon
kyl
john
weldon
jerome
cohen
argued
cause
appellees
brief
james
rutkowski
joseph
herman
filed
brief
agricultural
producers
labor
committee
et
al
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
mark
rosenbaum
fred
okrand
dennis
perluss
american
civil
liberties
union
foundation
southern
california
et
al
albert
woll
laurence
gold
american
federation
labor
congress
industrial
organizations
marvin
brenner
ellen
lake
filed
brief
agricultural
labor
relations
board
amicus
curiae
justice
white
delivered
opinion
case
review
decision
district
setting
aside
unconstitutional
arizona
farm
labor
statute
district
perceived
particular
constitutional
problems
five
provisions
act
deeming
provisions
inseparable
remainder
act
declared
entire
act
unconstitutional
enjoined
enforcement
conclude
challenges
two
provisions
specifically
invalidated
present
case
controversy
within
jurisdiction
federal
hence
adjudicated
although
attacks
two
provisions
justiciable
conclude
district
abstained
deciding
federal
issues
posed
material
unresolved
questions
state
law
determined
arizona
courts
finally
believe
district
properly
reached
merits
fifth
provision
erred
invalidating
accordingly
reverse
judgment
district
arizona
legislature
enacted
comprehensive
scheme
regulation
agricultural
employment
relations
arizona
agricultural
employment
relations
act
rev
stat
ann
supp
statute
designates
procedures
governing
election
employee
bargaining
representatives
establishes
various
rights
agricultural
employers
employees
proscribes
range
employer
union
practices
establishes
civil
criminal
enforcement
scheme
ensure
compliance
substantive
provisions
act
appellees
farm
workers
national
union
ufw
agent
ufw
named
farmworkers
supporter
ufw
commenced
suit
federal
secure
declaration
unconstitutionality
various
sections
act
well
entire
act
injunction
enforcement
district
convened
entertain
action
basis
past
instances
enforcement
act
light
provision
imposition
criminal
penalties
violat
ion
provision
act
rev
stat
ann
supp
determined
appellees
challenges
presently
justiciable
reaching
merits
claims
ruled
unconstitutional
five
distinct
provisions
act
specifically
disapproved
section
specifying
election
procedures
ground
failing
account
seasonal
employment
peaks
precluded
consummation
elections
workers
dispersed
hence
frustrated
associational
rights
agricultural
employees
also
view
act
restricted
unduly
class
employees
technically
eligible
vote
bargaining
representatives
hence
burdened
workers
freedom
association
second
respect
moreover
ruled
violative
first
fourteenth
amendments
provision
limiting
union
publicity
directed
consumers
agricultural
products
construed
section
proscribed
innocent
well
deliberately
false
representations
section
declared
infirm
additional
reason
prohibited
consumer
publicity
whether
true
false
implicating
product
trade
name
may
include
agricultural
products
employer
employer
protesting
labor
organization
engaged
primary
dispute
also
struck
statute
criminal
penalty
provision
vagueness
grounds
held
unconstitutional
provision
excusing
employer
furnishing
labor
organization
materials
information
time
facilities
enable
union
communicate
employer
employees
thought
latter
provision
permitted
employers
prevent
access
unions
migratory
farmworkers
residing
property
violation
guarantees
free
speech
association
finally
disapproved
provision
construed
mandating
compulsory
arbitration
ground
denied
employees
due
process
right
jury
trial
district
found
guaranteed
seventh
amendment
remainder
act
fell
reason
inseparability
inoperability
apart
provisions
found
invalid
supp
appellants
sought
review
judgment
substantial
doubts
regarding
justiciability
appellees
claims
postponed
consideration
jurisdiction
review
merits
hold
five
provisions
specifically
invalidated
district
sections
pertaining
election
bargaining
representatives
consumer
publicity
imposition
criminal
penalties
susceptible
judicial
resolution
time
conclude
district
abstained
adjudicating
appellees
challenge
consumer
publicity
criminal
penalty
provisions
although
think
constitutionality
election
procedures
properly
considered
even
lacking
prior
construction
arizona
courts
unable
sustain
district
declaration
however
election
procedures
facially
unconstitutional
ii
address
first
threshold
question
whether
appellees
alleged
case
controversy
within
meaning
art
iii
constitution
abstract
questions
currently
justiciable
federal
difference
abstract
question
case
controversy
one
degree
course
discernible
precise
test
see
maryland
casualty
pacific
coal
oil
basic
inquiry
whether
conflicting
contentions
parties
present
real
substantial
controversy
parties
adverse
legal
interests
dispute
definite
concrete
hypothetical
abstract
railway
mail
assn
corsi
see
evers
dwyer
maryland
casualty
pacific
coal
oil
supra
plaintiff
challenges
statute
must
demonstrate
realistic
danger
sustaining
direct
injury
result
statute
operation
enforcement
littleton
ne
await
consummation
threatened
injury
obtain
preventive
relief
injury
certainly
impending
enough
pennsylvania
west
virginia
see
regional
rail
reorganization
act
cases
pierce
society
sisters
contesting
constitutionality
criminal
statute
necessary
plaintiff
first
expose
actual
arrest
prosecution
entitled
challenge
statute
claims
deters
exercise
constitutional
rights
steffel
thompson
see
epperson
arkansas
evers
dwyer
supra
plaintiff
alleged
intention
engage
course
conduct
arguably
affected
constitutional
interest
proscribed
statute
exists
credible
threat
prosecution
thereunder
required
await
undergo
criminal
prosecution
sole
means
seeking
relief
doe
bolton
persons
fears
state
prosecution
except
imaginary
speculative
accepted
appropriate
plaintiffs
younger
harris
golden
zwickler
plaintiffs
claim
ever
threatened
prosecution
prosecution
likely
even
prosecution
remotely
possible
allege
dispute
susceptible
resolution
federal
younger
harris
supra
examining
claims
adjudicated
foregoing
principles
view
challenges
provisions
regulating
election
procedures
consumer
publicity
criminal
sanctions
challenges
present
case
controversy
already
noted
appellees
principal
complaint
statutory
election
procedures
entail
inescapable
delays
preclude
conducting
election
promptly
enough
permit
participation
many
farmworkers
engaged
production
crops
short
seasons
appellees
also
assail
assertedly
austere
limitations
eligible
participate
elections
act
appellees
admittedly
invoked
act
election
procedures
past
expressed
intention
future
see
appellees
reluctance
respect
defeat
justiciability
challenge
view
nature
claim
appellees
insist
agricultural
workers
constitutionally
entitled
select
representatives
bargain
employers
employment
conditions
appellees
read
statute
representatives
duly
elected
provisions
may
compel
employer
bargain
appellees
maintain
adduced
evidence
tending
prove
statutory
election
procedures
frustrate
rather
facilitate
democratic
selection
bargaining
representatives
ufw
declined
pursue
procedures
lack
interest
representing
arizona
farmworkers
negotiations
employers
due
procedures
asserted
futility
indeed
ufw
past
sought
represent
arizona
farmworkers
asserted
complaint
desire
organize
workers
represent
collective
bargaining
moreover
ufw
participated
nearly
elections
california
procedures
thought
amenable
prompt
fair
elections
lack
comparable
opportunity
arizona
said
impose
continuing
burden
appellees
associational
rights
even
though
challenged
statute
sure
work
injury
alleged
however
adjudication
might
postponed
better
factual
record
might
available
regional
rail
reorganization
act
cases
supra
thus
appellants
urge
decline
entertain
appellees
challenge
undertake
invoke
act
election
procedures
way
might
acquire
information
regarding
challenged
procedures
actually
operate
lieu
predictive
evidence
appellees
introduced
trial
persuaded
however
awaiting
appellees
participation
election
assist
resolution
threshold
question
whether
election
procedures
subject
scrutiny
first
amendment
regard
question
dispositive
appellees
challenge
elaborated
think
warrant
postponing
adjudication
election
claim
appellees
twofold
attack
act
limitation
consumer
publicity
also
justiciable
section
makes
unfair
labor
practice
induce
encourage
ultimate
consumer
agricultural
product
refrain
purchasing
consuming
using
agricultural
product
use
dishonest
untruthful
deceptive
publicity
violations
section
may
criminally
punishable
appellees
maintain
consumer
publicity
provision
unconstitutionally
penalizes
inaccuracies
inadvertently
uttered
course
consumer
appeals
record
shows
ufw
actively
engaged
consumer
publicity
campaigns
past
arizona
appellees
alleged
complaint
intention
continue
engage
boycott
activities
state
although
appellees
plan
propagate
untruths
contend
observed
erroneous
statement
inevitable
free
debate
new
york
times
sullivan
submit
avoid
criminal
prosecution
must
curtail
consumer
appeals
thus
forgo
full
exercise
insist
first
amendment
rights
urged
accordingly
challenge
limitation
consumer
publicity
plainly
poses
actual
case
controversy
appellants
maintain
criminal
penalty
provision
yet
applied
may
never
applied
commissions
unfair
labor
practices
including
forbidden
consumer
publicity
noted
fear
criminal
prosecution
allegedly
unconstitutional
statute
imaginary
wholly
speculative
plaintiff
need
first
expose
actual
arrest
prosecution
entitled
challenge
statute
steffel
thompson
consumer
publicity
provision
face
proscribes
dishonest
untruthful
deceptive
publicity
criminal
penalty
provision
applies
terms
ny
person
violates
provision
act
moreover
state
disavowed
intention
invoking
criminal
penalty
provision
unions
commit
unfair
labor
practices
appellees
thus
without
reason
fearing
prosecution
violation
ban
specified
forms
consumer
publicity
view
positions
parties
sufficiently
adverse
respect
consumer
publicity
provision
proscribing
misrepresentations
present
case
controversy
within
jurisdiction
district
section
also
said
limit
consumer
appeals
directed
products
labor
organization
involved
primary
dispute
appellees
construe
proscribes
publicity
directed
trademark
trade
name
generic
name
may
include
agricultural
products
another
producer
user
trademark
trade
name
generic
name
appellees
challenge
limitation
unduly
restricting
protected
speech
appellees
past
engaged
appeals
arguably
prohibited
statute
allege
intention
continue
reasons
appellees
challenge
first
aspect
consumer
publicity
provision
justiciable
think
claim
directed
second
aspect
may
entertained
well
conclude
attack
criminal
penalty
provision
also
subject
adjudication
time
section
authorizes
imposition
criminal
sanctions
ny
person
violates
provision
act
appellees
contend
penalty
provision
unconstitutionally
vague
give
notice
conduct
made
criminal
appellees
aver
previously
engaged
future
engage
organizing
boycotting
picketing
striking
activities
regulated
various
provisions
act
assert
sure
whether
criminal
sanctions
may
visited
upon
pursuing
conduct
much
allegedly
constitutionally
protected
noted
clear
appellees
desire
engage
least
consumer
publicity
campaigns
prohibited
act
accordingly
think
challenge
precision
criminal
penalty
provision
properly
entertained
district
may
raised
appeal
provision
truly
vague
appellees
expected
pursue
collective
activities
peril
appellees
challenge
access
provision
however
justiciable
provision
stipulates
employer
shall
required
furnish
make
available
labor
organization
information
time
facilities
enable
labor
organization
communicate
employees
employer
members
labor
organization
supporters
adherents
appellees
insist
district
held
provision
deprives
arizona
employment
relations
board
charged
responsibility
enforcing
act
discretion
compel
agricultural
employers
furnish
materials
information
time
facilities
labor
organizations
desirous
communicating
workers
located
employers
property
section
reason
violates
first
fourteenth
amendments
constitution
may
accepted
ufw
inevitably
seek
access
employers
property
order
organize
simply
communicate
farmworkers
conjectural
anticipate
access
denied
importantly
appellees
claim
depends
inextricably
upon
attributes
situs
involved
liken
farm
labor
camps
company
town
involved
marsh
alabama
first
amendment
held
operate
yet
impossible
know
whether
access
denied
places
fitting
appellees
constitutional
claim
hypothesize
event
come
pass
basis
constitutional
claim
adjudicated
time
opinion
patently
advisory
adjudication
appellees
challenge
access
provision
must
therefore
await
least
time
appellees
assert
interest
seeking
access
particular
facilities
well
palpable
basis
believing
access
refused
finally
constitutionality
allegedly
compulsory
arbitration
provision
also
improperly
considered
district
provision
specifies
employer
may
seek
obtain
injunction
upon
filing
verified
petition
showing
agricultural
employees
unlawfully
strike
unlawfully
conducting
boycott
unlawfully
threatening
strike
boycott
resulting
cessation
work
conduct
boycott
result
prevention
production
loss
spoilage
deterioration
reduction
grade
quality
marketability
agricultural
commodity
commodities
human
consumption
commercial
quantities
employer
invokes
jurisdiction
issue
temporary
restraining
order
enjoin
strike
employer
must
condition
thereto
agree
submit
dispute
binding
arbitration
means
settling
unresolved
issues
parties
agree
arbitrator
must
appoint
one
record
us
insufficiently
real
concrete
dispute
respect
application
provision
appellees
acknowledge
assuming
arguably
unlawful
strike
occur
employers
may
elect
pursue
range
responses
seeking
injunction
agreeing
arbitrate
moreover
appellees
never
contested
constitutionality
arbitration
clause
declare
three
judge
motion
found
binding
arbitration
provision
violative
substantive
due
process
seventh
amendment
brief
appellees
appellees
instead
raised
challenges
statute
civil
enforcement
scheme
consider
appeal
see
supra
clear
ruling
compulsory
arbitration
provision
wholly
advisory
iii
appellants
contend
even
assuming
appellees
claims
justiciable
district
abstained
adjudicating
claims
arizona
courts
might
authoritatively
construe
provisions
issue
disagree
appellees
challenge
statutory
election
procedures
first
submitted
arizona
courts
think
district
abstained
considering
constitutionality
criminal
penalty
provision
consumer
publicity
provision
pending
review
state
courts
observed
bstention
sanctions
escape
immediate
decision
narrowly
limited
special
circumstances
kusper
pontikes
quoting
lake
carriers
assn
macmullan
paradigm
special
circumstances
make
abstention
appropriate
case
challenged
state
statute
susceptible
construction
state
judiciary
avoid
modify
necessity
reaching
federal
constitutional
question
kusper
pontikes
supra
see
zwickler
koota
harrison
naacp
railroad
pullman
course
abstention
doctrine
contemplates
deference
state
adjudication
made
issue
state
law
uncertain
harman
forssenius
state
statute
issue
fairly
subject
interpretation
render
unnecessary
substantially
modify
federal
constitutional
question
abstention
may
required
order
avoid
unnecessary
friction
relations
interference
important
state
functions
tentative
decisions
questions
state
law
premature
constitutional
adjudication
think
construction
provision
governing
election
procedures
obviate
need
decision
constitutional
issue
materially
alter
question
decided
shall
discuss
resolution
question
whether
statutory
election
procedures
affected
first
amendment
interest
dispositive
appellees
challenge
insofar
bears
matter
statute
pointedly
clear
accordingly
perceive
basis
declining
decide
appellees
challenge
election
procedures
notwithstanding
absence
prior
adjudication
conclude
however
district
postponed
resolution
appellees
challenge
criminal
penalty
provision
section
provides
pertinent
part
ny
person
violates
provision
act
guilty
misdemeanor
appellees
maintain
penalty
provision
leaves
substantial
doubt
regarding
activities
elicit
criminal
sanctions
district
concluded
observing
onsidering
enormous
variety
activities
covered
act
penalty
section
clearly
statutory
provision
vague
men
common
intelligence
guess
meaning
elaborated
way
anyone
guess
whether
criminal
provisions
apply
particular
conduct
advance
clear
statute
unconstitutionally
vague
adequately
define
prohibited
conduct
therefore
violation
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
ibid
appellants
argue
criminal
penalty
provision
unambiguous
indeed
insist
provision
enforced
impossible
know
considered
violatio
act
brief
appellants
appellants
submit
various
unfair
labor
practices
example
treated
yet
criminal
violations
possible
however
penalty
provision
might
construed
broadly
applying
sections
act
affirmatively
proscribe
command
courses
conduct
terms
reaches
ny
person
violates
provision
act
alternatively
arizona
courts
might
conclude
limited
portions
act
susceptible
violated
thus
narrowly
define
reach
penalty
section
either
case
evident
statute
reasonably
susceptible
constructions
might
undercut
modify
appellees
vagueness
attack
may
construed
broadly
penalty
provision
operate
conjunction
substantive
provisions
act
restrict
unduly
pursuit
first
amendment
activities
least
evident
authoritative
construction
penalty
provision
may
significantly
alter
constitutional
questions
requiring
resolution
noted
course
extensive
adjudications
impact
variety
factual
situations
required
order
bring
challenged
statute
within
bounds
permissible
constitutional
certainty
abstention
may
inappropriate
baggett
bullitt
arizona
courts
may
determine
single
proceeding
substantive
provisions
penalty
provision
modifies
case
uncertain
issue
state
law
turns
upon
choice
one
several
alternative
meanings
state
statute
ibid
accordingly
think
arizona
courts
afforded
reasonable
opportunity
pass
upon
section
review
harrison
naacp
supra
district
abstained
respect
appellees
challenges
consumer
publicity
provision
well
appellees
argued
arizona
proscription
misrepresentations
labor
organizations
course
appeals
consumers
intolerably
inhibits
exercise
first
amendment
right
freely
discuss
issues
concerning
employment
farm
laborers
production
crops
appellants
submit
however
statutory
ban
untruthful
consumer
publicity
might
fairly
construed
arizona
proscribing
misrepresentations
made
knowledge
falsity
reckless
disregard
truth
falsity
qualification
appellees
insist
prohibition
misstatements
must
include
construction
effect
substantially
affect
constitutional
question
presented
reasonably
arguable
consumer
publicity
provision
susceptible
construction
appellants
suggest
section
makes
unlawful
induce
encourage
ultimate
consumer
agricultural
product
refrain
purchasing
consuming
using
agricultural
product
use
dishonest
untruthful
deceptive
publicity
emphasis
added
face
statute
forbid
propagation
untruths
without
rather
condemnable
consumer
publicity
must
dishonest
deceptive
well
untruthful
arizona
courts
may
well
conclude
dishonest
untruthful
statement
one
made
knowledge
falsity
reckless
disregard
falsity
sure
consumer
publicity
provision
provides
ermissible
inducement
encouragement
means
truthful
honest
nondeceptive
publicity
emphasis
added
phrase
may
read
indicate
representations
three
attributes
prohibited
act
held
phrase
denotes
truthful
honest
nondeceptive
publicity
permissible
publicity
prohibited
read
conjunction
prohibitory
clause
preceding
latter
phrase
thus
introduces
ambiguity
suitable
resolution
sum
think
adjudication
appellees
attack
statutory
limitation
untruthful
consumer
appeals
await
authoritative
interpretation
limitation
arizona
courts
conclude
district
abstained
adjudicating
appellees
additional
contention
consumer
publicity
provision
unconstitutionally
precludes
publicity
directed
products
employers
protesting
labor
organization
primary
dispute
think
means
clear
statute
fact
prohibits
publicity
solely
directed
products
particular
employers
already
discussed
declares
unfair
labor
practice
induce
encourage
ultimate
consumer
agricultural
products
refrain
purchasing
products
use
dishonest
untruthful
deceptive
publicity
provision
stipulates
permissible
inducement
encouragement
within
meaning
section
means
truthful
honest
publicity
identifies
agricultural
product
produced
agricultural
employer
labor
organization
primary
dispute
permissible
inducement
encouragement
include
publicity
directed
trademark
trade
name
generic
name
may
include
agricultural
products
another
producer
user
trademark
trade
name
generic
name
moreover
might
construed
light
prohibit
threatening
speech
latter
provision
pertinent
part
expressing
views
argument
opinion
making
statement
dissemination
views
whether
written
printed
graphic
visual
auditory
form
expression
contains
threat
reprisal
force
promise
benefit
shall
constitute
evidence
unfair
labor
practice
face
appear
qualify
latter
identifies
unfair
labor
practice
labor
organization
agents
consumer
publicity
provision
interpreted
intercept
expressions
embodying
threat
force
issue
constitutional
validity
assume
character
wholly
different
question
posed
appellees
construction
thus
conclude
district
erred
entertaining
aspects
appellees
challenge
consumer
publicity
section
without
benefit
construction
thereof
arizona
courts
sensitive
appellees
reluctance
repair
arizona
courts
extensive
litigation
federal
arena
nevertheless
hold
case
district
adjudicated
substantial
constitutional
claims
respect
statutory
provisions
patently
ambiguous
face
iv
merits
appellees
challenge
statutory
election
procedures
remain
considered
appellees
contend
district
concluded
delays
assertedly
attending
statutory
election
scheme
technical
limitations
may
vote
unit
elections
severely
curtail
appellees
freedom
association
freedom
said
entails
liberty
join
sustain
labor
union
collectively
express
position
agricultural
employer
also
create
elect
organization
entitled
invoke
statutory
provision
requiring
employer
bargain
collectively
certified
representative
employees
see
however
general
complaints
statutory
election
procedures
ineffective
matters
arizona
legislature
federal
courts
accepting
constitution
guarantees
workers
right
individually
collectively
voice
views
employers
see
givhan
western
line
consolidated
school
cf
madison
school
dist
wisconsin
employment
relations
constitution
afford
employees
right
compel
employers
engage
dialogue
even
listen
accordingly
arizona
constitutionally
obliged
provide
procedure
pursuant
agricultural
employees
chosen
representative
might
compel
employers
negotiate
undertaken
assertedly
niggardly
fashion
presents
general
matter
first
amendment
problems
moreover
act
preclude
voluntary
recognition
labor
organization
agricultural
employer
thus
event
employer
desires
bargain
representative
chosen
employees
independently
statutory
election
procedures
bargaining
may
readily
occur
statutory
procedures
need
pursued
farmworkers
desire
designate
exclusive
bargaining
representatives
compel
employer
bargain
rights
conferred
statute
rather
federal
constitution
accordingly
time
unable
discern
first
amendment
difficulty
arizona
statutory
election
scheme
whether
procedures
fair
efficacious
appellees
like
reversed
remanded
footnotes
district
analyze
section
section
case
controversy
existed
respect
challenged
sections
rather
instances
private
official
enforcement
detailed
stipulation
filed
parties
concluded
case
hypothetical
abstract
generalized
supp
however
focus
specifically
provision
makes
crime
violate
provision
act
although
district
deemed
section
severable
rest
act
relied
heavily
conclusion
jurisdiction
adjudicate
validity
section
justify
considering
constitutionality
sections
act
see
proceeding
ruled
evidence
considered
connection
dealing
election
bargaining
representatives
respect
limiting
union
access
employer
properties
although
evidence
introduced
trial
relative
provisions
explain
basis
selecting
challenges
presented
five
provisions
passed
judgment
section
declares
representatives
selected
secret
ballot
purpose
collective
bargaining
majority
agricultural
employees
appropriate
bargaining
unit
shall
exclusive
representatives
agricultural
employees
unit
purpose
collective
bargaining
requires
agricultural
employment
relations
board
ascertain
unit
appropriate
purposes
collective
bargaining
section
provides
board
shall
investigate
petition
alleging
facts
specified
indicating
question
representation
exists
schedule
appropriate
hearing
board
reasonable
cause
believe
question
representation
exist
hearing
establishes
question
exists
board
directed
order
election
secret
ballot
certify
results
thereof
section
details
manner
election
conducted
section
provides
procedures
employer
might
challenge
petition
election
additionally
stipulates
election
shall
directed
conducted
unit
within
valid
election
held
preceding
months
section
also
sets
certain
eligibility
requirements
regarding
participation
elections
conducted
thereunder
imposes
obligations
employers
furnish
information
board
made
available
interested
unions
employees
concerning
employees
qualified
vote
finally
section
specifies
procedures
whereby
agricultural
employees
may
seek
rescind
representation
authority
union
currently
representing
employees
election
provision
contemplates
voting
agricultural
employees
defined
exclude
workers
brief
history
employment
agricultural
employer
section
makes
unfair
labor
practice
labor
organization
agents
induce
encourage
ultimate
consumer
agricultural
product
refrain
purchasing
consuming
using
agricultural
product
use
dishonest
untruthful
deceptive
publicity
permissible
inducement
encouragement
within
meaning
section
means
truthful
honest
nondeceptive
publicity
identifies
agricultural
product
produced
agricultural
employer
labor
organization
primary
dispute
permissible
inducement
encouragement
include
publicity
directed
trademark
trade
name
generic
name
may
include
agricultural
products
another
producer
user
trademark
trade
name
generic
name
section
provides
person
knowingly
resists
prevents
impedes
interferes
member
board
agents
agencies
performance
duties
pursuant
article
violates
provision
article
guilty
class
misdemeanor
provisions
section
shall
apply
activities
carried
outside
state
arizona
section
provides
part
employer
shall
required
furnish
make
available
labor
organization
labor
organization
shall
required
furnish
make
available
employer
materials
information
time
facilities
enable
employer
labor
organization
case
may
communicate
employees
employer
members
labor
organization
supporters
adherents
section
provides
case
strike
boycott
threat
strike
boycott
agricultural
employer
may
grant
upon
proper
application
shall
grant
provided
section
restraining
order
enjoining
strike
boycott
provided
agricultural
employer
invokes
jurisdiction
issue
restraining
order
enjoin
strike
provided
subsection
said
employer
must
condition
thereto
agree
submit
dispute
binding
arbitration
means
settling
unresolved
issues
event
parties
agree
arbitrator
within
two
days
awards
restraining
order
shall
appoint
one
decide
unresolved
issues
agricultural
employer
shall
entitled
injunctive
relief
accorded
rule
arizona
rules
civil
procedure
upon
filing
verified
petition
showing
agricultural
employees
unlawfully
strike
unlawfully
conducting
boycott
unlawfully
threatening
strike
boycott
resulting
cessation
work
conduct
boycott
result
prevention
production
loss
spoilage
deterioration
reduction
grade
quality
marketability
agricultural
commodity
commodities
human
consumption
commercial
quantities
purpose
subsection
agricultural
commodity
commodities
human
consumption
market
value
five
thousand
dollars
shall
constitute
commercial
quantities
appellees
challenged
numerous
provisions
district
expressly
considered
disapproving
five
provisions
address
appeal
concluded
obviously
need
rule
plaintiffs
contentions
including
claimed
equal
protection
violation
enjoined
enforcement
act
entirety
finding
provisions
explicitly
invalidated
inseparable
actually
adjudicated
find
insufficient
reason
consider
first
instance
appellees
challenges
provisions
district
specifically
pass
judgment
although
appellants
contested
justiciability
appellees
several
challenges
act
provisions
contended
standing
particular
appellee
dubious
standing
conclude
least
ufw
sufficient
personal
stake
determination
constitutional
validity
three
aforementioned
provisions
present
real
substantial
controversy
admitting
specific
relief
decree
conclusive
character
buckley
valeo
omitted
quoting
aetna
life
ins
haworth
see
naacp
alabama
accordingly
assess
standing
remaining
appellees
see
buckley
valeo
supra
though
waiting
appellees
invoke
unsuccessfully
statutory
election
procedures
remove
doubt
existence
concrete
injury
resulting
application
election
provision
little
done
remedy
injury
incurred
particular
election
challengers
election
procedures
often
left
without
remedy
regard
immediate
election
election
far
underway
actually
consummated
prior
judgment
see
dunn
blumstein
moore
ogilvie
williams
rhodes
justiciability
cases
depends
much
fact
past
injury
prospect
occurrence
impending
future
election
see
storer
brown
rosario
rockefeller
dunn
blumstein
supra
value
adjudicating
election
challenges
notwithstanding
lapse
particular
election
construction
statute
understanding
operation
possible
constitutional
limits
application
effect
simplifying
future
challenges
thus
increasing
likelihood
timely
filed
cases
adjudicated
election
held
storer
brown
supra
emphasis
added
even
independently
criminal
sanctions
affirmatively
prohibits
variety
consumer
publicity
specified
therein
think
prospect
issuance
administrative
order
injunction
prohibited
conduct
provides
substantial
additional
support
conclusion
appellees
challenge
publicity
provision
justiciable
access
employer
property
boycotts
picketing
boycotts
striking
minorities
collective
bargaining
dissent
suggests
unambiguous
needs
construction
abstention
therefore
improper
district
invalidated
vagueness
grounds
state
position
respect
issue
reluctant
conclude
appellees
challenge
vagueness
grounds
without
substance
hence
contains
ambiguity
warranting
abstention
abstention
regarding
basis
clearly
criminalizes
departure
command
provision
act
adequate
consideration
whether
section
unconstitutionally
overbroad
require
inquiry
whether
conduct
prohibited
act
constitutionally
shielded
criminal
punishment
entail
dealing
validity
provisions
may
case
controversy
respect
abstention
proper
course
although
construing
section
manner
apparently
satisfy
appellees
understood
declaring
section
criminal
sanction
unconstitutional
proscribed
damaging
falsehoods
perpetrated
unknowingly
without
recklessness
adjudicated
role
first
amendment
suits
private
parties
nonmedia
defendants
considered
constitutional
implications
causes
action
injurious
falsehoods
outside
area
defamation
ground
covered
time
hill
linn
plant
guard
workers
holding
application
state
defamation
remedies
speech
uttered
labor
dispute
dependent
upon
showing
knowledge
recklessness
grounded
federal
labor
policy
though
case
constitutional
overtones
furthermore
express
view
whether
section
vulnerable
constitutional
attack
declared
false
consumer
publicity
whether
innocent
culpable
unfair
labor
practice
sanction
prospective
order
injunction
directing
defendant
cease
publishing
material
already
determined
false
section
constructed
prohibit
appeals
directed
products
agricultural
employers
whose
employees
labor
organization
actually
represent
constitutionality
substantially
doubt
even
picketing
may
narrowly
circumscribed
afl
swing
additional
difficulties
arise
section
interpreted
intercept
publicity
means
picketing
although
previously
concluded
picketing
aimed
discouraging
trade
across
board
truly
neutral
employer
may
barred
compatibly
constitution
carpenters
ritter
cafe
cf
nlrb
fruit
packers
noted
first
amendment
purposes
picketing
qualitatively
different
modes
communication
hughes
superior
see
buckley
valeo
teamsters
vogt
suggested
impact
abstention
appellees
pursuit
constitutionally
protected
activities
reduced
directing
district
protect
appellees
enforcement
state
statute
pending
definitive
resolution
issues
state
law
arizona
courts
see
harrison
naacp
matter
best
addressed
district
first
instance
consider
whether
election
procedures
deny
appellees
equal
protection
law
although
appellees
challenged
provisions
act
equal
protection
grounds
directed
argument
section
governing
election
procedures
understand
appellees
equal
protection
challenge
embrace
sections
pertaining
access
employer
property
consumer
publicity
determined
appellees
assault
first
provision
premature
appellees
attack
second
held
abeyance
pending
resort
arizona
courts
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
joins
concurring
part
dissenting
part
join
opinion
exception
respectfully
dissent
holding
district
abstained
postponed
resolution
appellees
constitutional
challenge
rev
stat
ann
supp
statutory
provision
construed
arizona
courts
must
stressed
bstention
exercise
federal
jurisdiction
exception
rule
doctrine
abstention
extraordinary
narrow
exception
duty
district
adjudicate
controversy
properly
county
allegheny
frank
mashuda
colorado
river
water
conservation
dist
state
statute
susceptible
construction
avoid
significantly
alter
constitutional
issue
however
abstention
appropriate
avoid
needless
friction
federal
pronouncements
state
policies
reetz
bozanich
today
correctly
points
state
statute
issue
must
fairly
subject
interpretation
render
unnecessary
substantially
modify
federal
constitutional
question
harman
forssenius
ante
emphasis
supplied
case
section
provides
part
person
violates
provision
article
guilty
misdemeanor
provisions
section
shall
apply
activities
carried
outside
state
arizona
district
clearly
correct
language
plain
unambiguous
davis
mann
statute
obviously
susceptible
limiting
construction
avoid
federal
constitutional
question
reached
district
zwickler
koota
course
every
attorney
knows
statutory
provision
made
ambiguous
sufficiently
assiduous
application
legal
discrimination
resorts
lawyerly
legerdemain
concludes
abstention
appropriate
arizona
courts
might
perhaps
find
limited
portions
agricultural
employment
relations
act
susceptible
violated
thus
narrowly
define
reach
penalty
section
ante
potential
ambiguity
thus
reads
derive
plain
words
statute
simply
invention
uncertainty
fairly
statute
abstention
particularly
inappropriate
respect
provision
impacts
directly
precious
first
amendment
rights
statute
creates
sanctions
violations
provisions
agricultural
employment
relations
act
regulate
speech
employees
employers
potential
impairment
first
amendment
interests
strongly
counsels
abstention
abstention
doctrine
automatic
rule
applied
whenever
federal
faced
doubtful
issue
state
law
rather
involves
discretionary
exercise
equity
powers
ascertainment
whether
exist
special
circumstances
propper
clark
prerequisite
application
must
made
basis
railroad
pullman
naacp
bennett
baggett
bullitt
relevant
exercise
equitable
discretion
constitutional
deprivation
alleged
probable
consequences
abstaining
harman
forssenius
often
remarked
equitable
practice
abstention
limited
considerations
delay
expense
application
abstention
doctrine
inevitably
gives
rise
lake
carriers
assn
macmullan
quoting
england
medical
examiners
bellotti
baird
therefore
constitutionally
protected
rights
speech
association
baggett
bullitt
supra
stake
abstention
becomes
especially
inappropriate
case
force
plaintiff
commenced
federal
action
suffer
delay
state
proceedings
might
effect
impermissible
chilling
constitutional
right
seeks
protect
zwickler
koota
supra
even
assuming
appellees
financial
resources
pursue
case
arizona
courts
appellees
may
well
avoid
speech
perhaps
constitutionally
protected
throughout
long
course
litigation
speech
might
fall
within
cold
shadow
criminal
liability
potential
abhorrent
first
amendment
permitted
equity
important
reasons
tolerated
basis
slender
ambiguity
managed
create
statute
abstention
issue
therefore
manifestly
unjustified
ambiguous
relationship
concur
holding
district
abstained
respect
district
also
found
unconstitutionally
vague
stated
considering
enormous
variety
activities
covered
act
fact
many
involve
first
fourteenth
amendment
constitutional
rights
clearly
statutory
provision
vague
men
common
intelligence
guess
meaning
way
anyone
guess
whether
criminal
provisions
apply
particular
conduct
advance
clear
statute
unconstitutionally
vague
adequately
define
prohibited
conduct
therefore
violation
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
ibid
fact
purposes
abstention
doctrine
plain
unambiguous
necessarily
mean
unconstitutionally
vague
purposes
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
section
may
plainly
unambiguously
create
criminal
sanctions
violations
sections
act
considered
criminal
prohibitions
unconstitutionally
vague
even
statute
ambiguous
manner
suggested
abstention
still
inappropriate
extraordinarily
unlikely
statute
complex
far
ranging
act
single
adjudication
definitively
specify
exact
reach
circumstances
held
federal
abstain
exercising
jurisdiction
stated
procunier
martinez
case
statute
regulation
challenged
vague
individuals
plainly
applies
simply
understand
required
wish
forswear
activity
arguably
within
scope
vague
terms
abstention
required
baggett
bullitt
case
single
adjudication
state
eliminate
constitutional
difficulty
rather
require
extensive
adjudications
impact
variety
factual
situations
bring
challenged
statute
regulation
within
bounds
permissible
constitutional
certainty
ibid
section
example
makes
unfair
labor
practice
induce
encourage
ultimate
consumer
agricultural
product
refrain
purchasing
consuming
using
agricultural
product
use
dishonest
untruthful
deceptive
publicity
permissible
inducement
encouragement
within
meaning
section
means
truthful
honest
nondeceptive
publicity
identifies
agricultural
product
produced
agricultural
employer
labor
organization
primary
dispute
permissible
inducement
encouragement
include
publicity
directed
trademark
trade
name
generic
name
may
include
agricultural
products
another
producer
user
trademark
trade
name
generic
name
section
makes
violation
crime
appellees
may
deterred
constitutionally
protected
speech
even
regulations
agricultural
employment
relations
act
otherwise
imposes
speech
permissible
first
amendment
criminal
sanctions
discourage
speech
much
powerfully
administrative
regulations
sanctions
thus
apt
cause
employers
employees
steer
far
wider
unlawful
zone
speiser
randall
likely
contract
breathing
space
necessary
survival
first
amendment
freedoms
naacp
button
reason
follow
first
amendment
permits
certain
speech
regulated
must
also
permit
speech
punished
see
gertz
robert
welch
first
amendment
interests
involved
view
district
remand
issue
injunction
protect
appellees
enforcement
state
statute
pending
definitive
resolution
issues
state
law
arizona
courts
see
harrison
naacp
ante