In the Danbury Hatters' case, the Supreme Court held that the union boycott was a combination in restraint of trade within the meaning of the:

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Danbury Hatters' case was decided in 1908, before the National Labor Relations Act, the Clayton Act, and the Sarbanes Oxley Act were passed. Therefore, the only valid option is the Sherman Act, which was the main federal antitrust law at the time. The Supreme Court held that the union boycott was a combination in restraint of trade because it sought to force the manufacturers to deal only with union members, thereby creating a monopoly and limiting competition in the hat-making industry. The Court's decision had important implications for labor relations and antitrust law, as it established the principle that labor unions could be subject to antitrust liability for their concerted activities.

In the Danbury Hatters' Case, the Supreme Court Held That