Lobbying is not limited to specific venues if that's what you mean. It's "attempting to influence the actions, policies, or decisions of officials in their daily life, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies". Isn't the NLRB exactly such an agency, given its power to undo a precedent?
Whether you do it by "urging" them in a justice court or "influencing" them on a tennis court it's still the same even when arguing semantics.
Arguing in court that this specific case doesn't fall under the regulation is just arguing in court. Arguing to undo the regulation is literally lobbying. They are asking people with the power to regulate to undo regulation. Read this as you wish.
Unless the Bloomberg article is misleading in the way it words the story then I believe my comment is pretty accurate.
Lobbying is not limited to specific venues if that's what you mean. It's "attempting to influence the actions, policies, or decisions of officials in their daily life, most often legislators or members of regulatory agencies". Isn't the NLRB exactly such an agency, given its power to undo a precedent?
Whether you do it by "urging" them in a justice court or "influencing" them on a tennis court it's still the same even when arguing semantics.
Arguing in court that this specific case doesn't fall under the regulation is just arguing in court. Arguing to undo the regulation is literally lobbying. They are asking people with the power to regulate to undo regulation. Read this as you wish.
Unless the Bloomberg article is misleading in the way it words the story then I believe my comment is pretty accurate.