In this paper, we investigate the institutional interdependence between courts and police in the governance of picketing. The analysis contributes insight into how economic and security rights are balanced against political and civil rights in the oblique affirmation of a grounding of authority which is arguably more potent because of the indirectness of its everyday construction. We proceed by deriving the concept “judgement by deferral” from current literature on governance. We apply this to an investigation of how courts evaluate injunction claims in cases involving picketing and how police responsibilities are understood in these cases. We then examine police perception of their role in the governance of picketing and demonstrate how both the courts and police engage in deferral practices to avoid hard decisions. Finally, we show how these practices comprise a systemic approach to the governance of picketing, which can nonetheless break down in its application. Our sources for this assessment consist of court cases and our own interview samples drawn from police, union and management officials.