FEDERAL · 29 U.S.C. · Chapter SUBCHAPTER II—NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
Investigatory powers of Board
29 U.S.C. § 161
Title29 — Labor
ChapterSUBCHAPTER II—NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
This text of 29 U.S.C. § 161 (Investigatory powers of Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
29 U.S.C. § 161.
Text
For the purpose of all hearings and investigations, which, in the opinion of the Board, are necessary and proper for the exercise of the powers vested in it by sections 159 and 160 of this title—
The Board, or its duly authorized agents or agencies, shall at all reasonable times have access to, for the purpose of examination, and the right to copy any evidence of any person being investigated or proceeded against that relates to any matter under investigation or in question. The Board, or any member thereof, shall upon application of any party to such proceedings, forthwith issue to such party subpenas requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses or the production of any evidence in such proceedings or investigation requested in such application. Within five days after the service o
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
National Labor Relations Board v. Wyman-Gordon Co.
394 U.S. 759 (Supreme Court, 1969)
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Shell Oil Co.
466 U.S. 54 (Supreme Court, 1984)
National Labor Relations Board v. Scrivener
405 U.S. 117 (Supreme Court, 1972)
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Lutheran Social Services
186 F.3d 959 (D.C. Circuit, 1999)
Marshall v. Sun Petroleum Products Co.
622 F.2d 1176 (Third Circuit, 1980)
Ryser v. State
284 P.3d 337 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 2012)
Ali Boureslan v. Aramco, Arabian American Oil Co. And Aramco Service Company
892 F.2d 1271 (Fifth Circuit, 1990)
New Orleans Steamship Ass'n v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
680 F.2d 23 (Fifth Circuit, 1982)
National Labor Relations Board v. Interstate Builders, Inc.
351 F.3d 1020 (Tenth Circuit, 2003)
Hemphill v. Lenz
195 A.2d 780 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1963)
Federal Maritime Commission v. DeSmedt
366 F.2d 464 (Second Circuit, 1966)
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Western Publishing Co.
502 F.2d 599 (Eighth Circuit, 1974)
National Labor Relations Board v. C. C. C. Associates, Inc.
306 F.2d 534 (Second Circuit, 1962)
Food Town Stores, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
708 F.2d 920 (Fourth Circuit, 1983)
Department of Air Force v. Federal Labor Relations Authority
877 F.2d 1036 (D.C. Circuit, 1989)
Graphic Communications International Union, Local 554 v. Salem-Gravure Division of World Color Press, Inc.
843 F.2d 1490 (D.C. Circuit, 1988)
National Labor Relations Board v. Delaware Valley Armaments, Inc.
431 F.2d 494 (Third Circuit, 1970)
Fugazy Continental Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
514 F. Supp. 718 (E.D. New York, 1981)
Amerijet International, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
520 F. App'x 795 (Eleventh Circuit, 2013)
Foreman v. Thalmayer
393 F. Supp. 1396 (N.D. Texas, 1975)
Source Credit
History
(July 5, 1935, ch. 372, §11, 49 Stat. 455; June 23, 1947, ch. 120, title I, §101, 61 Stat. 150; June 25, 1948, ch. 646, §32(b), 62 Stat. 991; May 24, 1949, ch. 139, §127, 63 Stat. 107; Pub. L. 91–452, title II, §234, Oct. 15, 1970, 84 Stat. 930; Pub. L. 86–507, §1(57), June 11, 1960, as added Pub. L. 96–245, May 21, 1980, 94 Stat. 347.)
Editorial Notes
Editorial Notes
Codification
The original text of par. (2) contained a reference to the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia. Act June 25, 1948, as amended by act May 24, 1949, substituted "United States District Court for the District of Columbia" for "District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia". However, the words "United States District Court for the District of Columbia" have now been deleted entirely as superfluous in view of section 132(a) of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, which states that "There shall be in each judicial district a district court which shall be a court of record known as the United States District Court for the district", and section 88 of Title 28 which states that "the District of Columbia constitutes one judicial district".
Amendments
1980—Par. (4). Pub. L. 96–245 inserted provisions authorizing service by certified mail.
1970—Par. (3). Pub. L. 91–452 struck out par. (3) which related to the immunity from prosecution of any individual compelled to testify or produce evidence after claiming his privilege against self-incrimination.
1947—Act June 23, 1947, restated section with addition of provisions requiring the issuance of subpenas as a matter of course on the request of any party.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
Effective Date of 1970 Amendment
Amendment by Pub. L. 91–452 effective on sixtieth day following Oct. 15, 1970, and not to affect any immunity to which any individual is entitled under this section by reason of any testimony given before sixtieth day following Oct. 15, 1970, see section 260 of Pub. L. 91–452, set out as an Effective Date; Savings Provisions note under section 6001 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure.
Effective Date of 1947 Amendment
For effective date of amendment by act June 23, 1947, see section 104 of act June 23, 1947, set out as a note under section 151 of this title.
Codification
The original text of par. (2) contained a reference to the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia. Act June 25, 1948, as amended by act May 24, 1949, substituted "United States District Court for the District of Columbia" for "District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia". However, the words "United States District Court for the District of Columbia" have now been deleted entirely as superfluous in view of section 132(a) of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, which states that "There shall be in each judicial district a district court which shall be a court of record known as the United States District Court for the district", and section 88 of Title 28 which states that "the District of Columbia constitutes one judicial district".
Amendments
1980—Par. (4). Pub. L. 96–245 inserted provisions authorizing service by certified mail.
1970—Par. (3). Pub. L. 91–452 struck out par. (3) which related to the immunity from prosecution of any individual compelled to testify or produce evidence after claiming his privilege against self-incrimination.
1947—Act June 23, 1947, restated section with addition of provisions requiring the issuance of subpenas as a matter of course on the request of any party.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
Effective Date of 1970 Amendment
Amendment by Pub. L. 91–452 effective on sixtieth day following Oct. 15, 1970, and not to affect any immunity to which any individual is entitled under this section by reason of any testimony given before sixtieth day following Oct. 15, 1970, see section 260 of Pub. L. 91–452, set out as an Effective Date; Savings Provisions note under section 6001 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure.
Effective Date of 1947 Amendment
For effective date of amendment by act June 23, 1947, see section 104 of act June 23, 1947, set out as a note under section 151 of this title.
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
29 U.S.C. § 161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/29/161.