Thursday, June 20, 2024
Hawai'i Free Press

Current Articles | Archives

Monday, February 26, 2018
Supreme Court Justices Excoriate Union Lawyers Defending Forced Dues
By Selected News Articles @ 1:36 PM :: 5881 Views :: First Amendment, Labor

Labor Power In Balance As Justices Excoriate Union Lawyers Defending Forced Dues

by Kevin Daley, Daily Caller, February 26, 2018

The immense political influence of public sector unions appeared imperiled Monday, as several justices of the U.S. Supreme Court grilled labor lawyers over the constitutionality of mandatory union dues.

Though their liberal colleagues warned of dire consequences, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito excoriated advocates defending forced fees.

Alito invoked the legacy of St. Thomas More, who chose to die rather than lend his name to a position he disagreed with, while Kennedy said the unions were asking the court to ignore reality.

Over five million government employees are required by law to pay dues to public-sector unions. A 1977 Supreme Court precedent called Abood v. Detroit Board of Education allows labor bosses are to collect compulsory dues, known as fair share fees, from public employees since union negotiators represent all government workers for purposes of collective bargaining — even if they are not union members. The decision prohibits unions from using mandatory fees for political purposes like electioneering.

Critics of the arrangement say fair share fees violate the First Amendment, since dissenting workers are forced to subsidize speech with which they disagree. They also say the distinction Abood creates is unworkable, since all government union activity necessarily implicates political activity.

Monday’s case arose from Illinois where a state child support specialist named Mark Janus sued the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) in hopes of ending the fair share regime. Janus pays out approximately $600 per year in union fees. AFSCME is the largest public employee union in the country.

“The ruling we are seeking would not prevent a single worker from joining or paying dues to a union if they voluntarily choose to,” said William Messenger, the lawyer who represented Janus at the high court. “It would simply recognize that the First Amendment protects government employees from being compelled to subsidize union speech.”

David Frederick, who represents the AFSCME, says mandatory fees are essential for labor peace, and warned of an “untold specter of labor unrest across the country,” in the justices end the practice.

A majority of the court evinced discomfort with Abood in a pair of labor cases argued in 2012 and 2014. The justices heard a direct First Amendment challenge to fair share fees in January 2016, but Justice Antonin Scalia’s death shortly thereafter precluded the court from definitively resolving the controversy. Without Scalia, the tribunal split four to four so a binding decision was never issued.

The court was restored to its full complement of nine in April 2017 with Justice Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation, and the bench agreed to revisit the issue. If the justices again divide along ideological contours, Gorsuch will give the anti-Abood conservatives the fifth vote they need to strike down mandatory dues.

Gorsuch did not offer clues as to his thinking about the case. He was silent during Monday’s arguments and has not written extensively on this subject during his career on the federal bench.

A decision in the case, Janus v. AFSCME, is expected by June.




TEXT "follow HawaiiFreePress" to 40404

Register to Vote


Aloha Pregnancy Care Center


Antonio Gramsci Reading List

A Place for Women in Waipio

Ballotpedia Hawaii

Broken Trust

Build More Hawaiian Homes Working Group

Christian Homeschoolers of Hawaii

Cliff Slater's Second Opinion

DVids Hawaii


Fix Oahu!

Frontline: The Fixers

Genetic Literacy Project

Grassroot Institute

Hawaii Aquarium Fish Report

Hawaii Aviation Preservation Society

Hawaii Catholic TV

Hawaii Christian Coalition

Hawaii Cigar Association

Hawaii ConCon Info

Hawaii Debt Clock

Hawaii Defense Foundation

Hawaii Family Forum

Hawaii Farmers and Ranchers United

Hawaii Farmer's Daughter

Hawaii Federation of Republican Women

Hawaii History Blog

Hawaii Jihadi Trial

Hawaii Legal News

Hawaii Legal Short-Term Rental Alliance

Hawaii Matters

Hawaii Military History

Hawaii's Partnership for Appropriate & Compassionate Care

Hawaii Public Charter School Network

Hawaii Rifle Association

Hawaii Shippers Council

Hawaii Together


Hiram Fong Papers

Homeschool Legal Defense Hawaii

Honolulu Navy League

Honolulu Traffic

House Minority Blog

Imua TMT

Inouye-Kwock, NYT 1992

Inside the Nature Conservancy

Inverse Condemnation

July 4 in Hawaii

Land and Power in Hawaii

Lessons in Firearm Education

Lingle Years

Managed Care Matters -- Hawaii

Missile Defense Advocacy

MIS Veterans Hawaii

NAMI Hawaii

National Parents Org Hawaii

NFIB Hawaii News

NRA-ILA Hawaii


OHA Lies

Opt Out Today

Patients Rights Council Hawaii

Practical Policy Institute of Hawaii

Pritchett Cartoons

Pro-GMO Hawaii

Rental by Owner Awareness Assn

Research Institute for Hawaii USA

Rick Hamada Show

RJ Rummel

School Choice in Hawaii

Talking Tax

Tax Foundation of Hawaii

The Real Hanabusa

Time Out Honolulu

Trustee Akina KWO Columns

West Maui Taxpayers Association

What Natalie Thinks

Whole Life Hawaii