Thursday, June 14, 2007

Breaking News--Supreme Court: Unions Do NOT Have A Right To Spend Compulsory Union Dues On Politics

From National Right To Work, the organization that filed the lawsuit:

Washington, DC (June 14, 2007) - The U.S. Supreme Court today unanimously reversed a novel Washington State Supreme Court ruling that discovered a “constitutional right” for union officials to spend dissenting employees’ mandatory dues on political causes they oppose. The ruling merely reinstates an ineffective state campaign finance law that had opened the door for courts to misinterpret the First Amendment.

And before you u-bots and assorted lefties whine about "President Bush's Supreme Court", etc, let me remind you that this decision was unanimous.

I can't claim a total victory, though:

In striking down the Washington High Court ruling, however, the U.S. Supreme Court avoided the more critical and far sweeping question -- whether union officials should be able to automatically collect forced dues for politics from nonunion members in the first place. That clarification, sought by Foundation attorneys would have freed roughly one million nonunion employees nationwide from each having hundreds of dollars in compulsory dues automatically deducted each year. Surprisingly, the U.S. Solicitor General actually supported the union’s position on this key question and tried to steer the Justices away from ruling in the employees’ favor...

“America’s workers laboring under compulsory unionism are little better off after today’s ruling,” stated Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “Rather than promoting more ineffective campaign finance regulations that risk further undermining the First Amendment, sincere reformers should instead turn their attention to attacking the root problem of compulsory unionism. No one should be forced to join or pay dues to a union in the first place.”

Still, this decision is good news for all American workers, certainly better than if the Court had ruled the other way.

I know someone who went to DC and was present while this case was being argued. She was most impressed.

No comments: