No. 12-_________ ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS UNION LOCAL 8. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA --------------------------------- --------------------------------- PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI --------------------------------- --------------------------------- MIRIAM A. VOGEL DEANNE E. MAYNARD TIMOTHY F. RYAN Counsel of Record MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP MARC A. HEARRON 555 W. Fifth St., Suite 3500 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP Los Angeles, CA 90013 2000 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. 213.892.5200 Washington, DC 20006
[email protected] 202.887.8740 MARCH 25, 2013 Counsel for Petitioner ================================================================ COCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING CO. (800) 225-6964 OR CALL COLLECT (402) 342-2831 QUESTION PRESENTED Shortly after petitioner opened its grocery store in Sacramento, respondent union’s agents began picketing on the store’s private property (at the entrance to the store, on the apron area, and in the parking lot). The picketing continued five days a week, eight hours each day, for several years. Because the content of the picketers’ expression was labor-related, the California Supreme Court held that two state statutes, the Moscone Act (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 527.3) and Section 1138.1 of the Califor- nia Labor Code, protect the union’s expressive activi- ty and bar injunctive relief to exclude the demonstrators from the store’s private property. Notwithstanding the store’s right to exclude all other kinds of expressive activities (political, religious, and so on), the California Supreme Court held that nei- ther statute violates the U.S. Constitution. In so holding, the California Supreme Court expressly disagreed with the D.C.