U.S. Supreme Court

Foundation Action: Supreme Court Justices Hammer Union Lawyers During Oral Arguments

Patrick Semmens — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:26:47 -0500

The cover story of the hot-off-the-press November-December issue of Foundation Action recaps the exciting oral arguments of the Foundation's Locke v. Karass case, which was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in early October.

Read the whole story here (pdf) and sign up today for a free print subscription.

To receive the entire issue via email, just type your email address into the box in the top right corner of this page.

Foundation Action: High Court Agrees with Foundation on Coercive Organizing Law

Anthony Riedel — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:52:10 -0400

This article from the September/October issue of Foundation Action discusses the June 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision in United States Chamber of Commerce v. Jerry Brown.

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed arguments, with which the Supreme Court agreed, to overturn a controversial California law that pressured companies to assist in coercive union organizing drives.

Read the whole story here (pdf) and sign up today for a free print subscription.

To receive the entire issue via email, just type your email address into the box in the top right corner of this page.

Foundation Action: Supreme Court Issues Rare Rebuke to Meddling Bush Lawyers

Anthony Riedel — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:36:18 -0400

The September/October issue of Foundation Action reports on the rare U.S. Supreme Court rebuke of Bush Administration lawyers seeking to argue before the High Court in the October 6, 2008 oral arguments of Locke v. Karass.

Foundation attorneys successfully argued that the Bush Administration had no business getting involved in the proceedings.

Read the whole story here (pdf) and sign up today for a free print subscription.

To receive the entire issue via email, just type your email address into the box in the top right corner of this page.

Maine State Employees Get Their Day in Court in the National Right to Work Foundation's Fourteenth Supreme Court Case

Patrick Semmens — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 13:05:04 -0400

From 11 to noon today the United States Supreme Court heard arguments in Locke v. Karass, in which Foundation Staff Attorney Jim Young represented 20 Maine State employees challenging attempts by the SEIU union to charge the nonmembers for union litigation unrelated to their collective bargaining unit.

Here, lead plaintiff Daniel Locke takes questions from reporters flanked (left to right) by Former Maine State employee Mark Turek of UnfairShare.org, Foundation V.P. Stefan Gleason and Foundation Staff Attorney Jim Young:

Locke Box: Next Week's Supreme Court Case Threatens Big Labor's Legal Slush Fund

Nick Cote — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:21:46 -0400

Oral arguments in Locke v. Karass, the Foundation's latest Supreme Court case, occur on Monday, October 6. Just in time, the October issue of Labor Watch features a cover story on the case by Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation:

The U.S. Supreme Court has so far refused to recognize that all compulsory union dues, no matter how they are spent, violate workers’ First Amendment rights and that no compelling state interest exists to justify subverting these rights. However, the Court has concluded that forced union dues for certain union expenditures violates nonmembers’ First Amendment rights. U.S. Supreme Court rulings have established that union officials cannot compel nonmembers to support union lobbying, political activities and other forms of ideological expression.

read more

Union Lawyers Welcome U.S. Solicitor General To Their Legal Team in Locke Supreme Court Case

Patrick Semmens — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:24:27 -0400

Yesterday, SCOTUSblog reported on the opposition by National Right to Work Foundation attorneys to the Solicitor General's self-contradictory motion for divided arguments in the Foundation's Locke v. Karass Supreme Court case. (For more background on the SG's unwelcome machinations and the Foundation's principled opposition, read this post.)

The SCOTUSblog post brings to light this new tidbit of news: "Jeremiah Collins, a lawyer for the respondent, said the union did not plan to file an opposition."

Of course he won't. The Solicitor General is making Big Labor's legal arguments. Why not add another lawyer to the union legal team at taxpayer expense?

Video Spotlight on Locke Supreme Court Case

Patrick Semmens — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:44:58 -0400

In the latest update to Right to Work's YouTube channel, Daniel Locke, lead plaintiff in the Foundation's Locke v. Karass Supreme Court case, discusses why he felt the need to file suit against Maine State Employees Association union officials.

Also in the video, Foundation president Mark Mix explains what is at stake in the case, and another Maine state employee, Mark Turek, discusses his decision to quit his job rather than be forced to pay union dues to a union he disagreed with.

Supreme Court Agrees with Foundation; Strikes Down a Prototype Union Organizing Law

Will Collins — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 16:31:04 -0400

In case you missed it, the Supreme Court just struck down (pdf) a biased California statute that prevented companies who received state grants from sharing accurate information about unions with their employees. Foundation attorneys filed an amicus curiae brief in support of overturning the Ninth Circuit's flawed reasoning.

The Foundation's press release is now available online. Money quote:

Had the Ninth Circuit’s ruling not been overturned, employees of companies accepting funds from the state would be denied truthful information regarding the downsides of unionization. Employers could have ultimately been blackballed from government contracts unless they cleared the path for union organizers to recruit new forced dues-paying union members.

read more

Foundation Urges Supreme Court to Uphold Ban on Payroll Deductions for Politics

Patrick Semmens — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:28:22 -0400

In March, at the urging of the National Right to Work Foundation, the U.S. Supreme Court took up Ysursa v. Pocatello Education Association. Now the Foundation has jointly filed an amicus curiae brief (pdf) in the case.

The High Court is reviewing a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that says that Idaho's state law banning payroll deductions for union political expenditures (narrowly defined) can not apply to payroll deductions at the local government level.

As the Foundation's brief explains, the Ninth Circuit's ruling wrongly forces Idaho taxpayers to subsidize union political activities by offering valuable payroll deduction services to union officials.

Oral Argument Date Set in Foundation's Locke Supreme Court Case

Patrick Semmens — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:47:22 -0400

The U.S. Supreme Court has set the date for oral argument in Locke v. Karass, which was brought to the High Court by Foundation attorneys on behalf of a group of Maine state employees.

Arguments will be at 11am on October 6, 2008 - the opening day of the the Supreme Court's session.

The case deals with the criteria for determining what workers can be forced to pay to a union as a job condition. For more on the Locke case stay tuned for an upcoming video.