The Aftermath of Janus: Initial Union Reaction and the Status of the New Cases So Far

 

 

One of the more controversial Supreme Court decisions in 2018 was Janus v. AFSCME, 138 S.Ct. 2448 (2018), in which the Court decided that a public-sector union’s extraction of agency fees from nonconsenting public-sector employees violates the First Amendment. Thus, unions may no longer deduct fees that could be used to subsidize political speech those employees disagreed with unless the employee freely gave his or her consent for them to do so, which consent the union must show existed by clear and compelling evidence. In Janus’ wake, public-sector unions have, in some circumstances, ordered their local chapters to stop agency-fee payments. Reason reported that AFSCME and SEIU lost 98 and 94 percent, respectively, of their agency-fee payers post-Janus. 1 But—and key to this discussion—the unions’ compliance with Janus has been strictly limited to what they perceive to be Janus’ factual scope.

 

Speaker: 

• Douglas P. Seaton, Founder and President, Upper Midwest Law Center & Senior Counsel, Seaton Peters Revnew

This event is free, but you must RSVP to Bryan Symes at [email protected].