Supreme Court split over teachers’ dues delivers win for unions

by  |  published on March 30, 2016

The Supreme Court split 4-4 Tuesday on a challenge brought by public school teachers who objected to paying union dues, delivering a big win for the unions – in the first major case where the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s vote would have proved decisive.

The California teachers in the case had challenged a state law requiring non-union workers to pay “fair share” fees into the public-employee unions to cover collective bargaining costs.

The court, with its split decision, left in place a lower court ruling favoring the unions.

The result is an unlikely victory for organized labor after it seemed almost certain the high court would rule 5-4 to overturn a system in place nearly 40 years. The court is operating with only eight justices after the death of Scalia, who had been expected to rule against the unions.

  • Wolfman

    Where in the Constitution does it say the Federal Government has a say in who pays Union Dues??? Those powers not enumerated to the Feds in the Constitution are the sole power of the States. The sad ass Senate and House need to defund the Supreme Court to the point that it can barely sustain its own quarters. Oh by the way there is no part in the Constitution that says that the Supreme Court even has a right to an office space. If they are supposed to judge a law to be Constitutional or not , shouldn’t it first be denoted as a Federal Power to be decided by ANY FEDERAL COURT …it should stop at the highest State Court level and never reach a Federal Court at all!!! It is not even ” Interstate Commerce” because a rule that applies to a Union in one State does not even exist in another State . Even if the other State has its own Union Dues Rule… it cannot be applied to a Union activity in another State regardless of what it says. The Supreme Court is not the final say on States Rights. The States need to get some guts or they are complicit in their own demise.

  • Richard Hennessy

    Just another in the long history of unconstitutional decisions by the present Supreme Court. There is no way to justify such forced participation in an organization with which one disagrees. The Constitution guarantees freedom of association. Even when Scalia was on the court, it was still corrupt in many of its decisions, such as Obamacare and gay marriage.

    • rockcut

      Every thing you do not like is unconstitutional. Now, I got it. Thanks God the Teachers won.

  • Dirtybird38

    I think at best for the unions, this is a temporary victory. Once the 9th justice is seated this none-decision will be revisited as soon as another suit is brought. If it’s a perceived conservative justice, that will come quickly. If not, it may linger. But always as a shadow stalking the unions.

    • carpkiller

      It depends on if it is obamas judge or the next prezs judge.

  • Gerry Costa

    Of course the not so supreme court’s decision was split. They would NOT dare to vote against the unions and obozo’s donors. So what it means is that now we have 4 true judges and then we have 4 puppet judges whose strings are being pulled by this administration or we have just a bunch of people playing a political game and every non-decision will be a tie until obozo gets his way and nominates another puppet.

    • Rodney Steward

      4 socialist judges!!

Google Analytics Alternative