Davenport v. WEA

Argued before the US Supreme Court yesterday was a case arising from Washington State. At issue: whether or not unions should be able to spend non-member (agency fee payers, like I am) dues money on political causes without getting the payer's permission to do so.

Obviously, we at CTEN are watching the case closely!

What's wild is that I know someone who actually got to sit in the courtroom and hear the case as it was argued. How cool is that? Can you imagine how amazing it would be to hear arguments before the Supreme Court in a case that has some personal significance for you? I'll try to get her to send me some of her impressions so I can post them here--a firsthand account of watching the Supreme Court in action. I'm obviously in awe, and somewhat jealous.

Here are a few links from different sources about yesterday's case:

Wall Street Journal Online
The Seattle Times
Slate
New York Times
Washington (DC) Post

Slate simplifies the case in the most entertaining manner:

Remember that first day of college, when the dean of students explained to the young women that 19-year-old boys would be inclined to grope them pretty much constantly for the next four years unless they yelled, "No"? Section 760 more or less shifted the burden to the boys to ask if the girls want to be groped...

This probably isn't good news for the unions, which are about to see their power to engage in political advocacy sharply limited by the high court. But as the justices seem mostly to agree today, it's certainly not illogical to assume that if that cute freshman from your Russian-lit class already told you she didn't want to go on a date with you, it's a pretty safe bet she doesn't want to have sex with you, either.

I told you it was entertaining!