Mandatory union fees and the First Amendment
The Supreme Court is considering arguments in a case that could have a huge effect on public-section unions and their membership.Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) will be heard on February 26 at the Court. The question in front of the nine Justices is if public-sector “agency shop” arrangements—payments that workers represented by a union must pay even if they are not dues-paying members—should be invalidated under the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court said in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977) that government employees who don’t belong to a union can be required to pay for union contract negotiating costs that benefit to all public employees, including non-union members.
The Abood decision has been challenged several times and an evenly divided Court couldn’t decide a similar case, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, in 2016. This time, a full Court will consider the issue.
Joining us to discuss the case and the issues at stake are two leading constitutional experts.
Alicia Hickok is a Partner at the law firm Drinker Biddle and a Lecturer in law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. She wrote an amicus brief in the Janus case on behalf of the Rutherford Institute, siding with Janus’s position.
Eugene Volokh is Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law at UCLA Law School. He co-wrote an amicus brief in Janus with Will Baude siding with the union.
Jeffrey Rosen is the President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Constitution Center, the only institution in America chartered by Congress “to disseminate information about the United States Constitution on a nonpartisan basis.” He is also a professor at The George Washington University Law School, and a contributing editor for The Atlantic.
Related Decisions and Documents
- Brief of the Rutherford Institute as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner in 16-144, Janus v. AFSCME (Alicia Hickok’s brief filed December 10, 2017)
- Brief of Professors Eugene Volokh and William Baude as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents in 16-144, Janus v. AFSCME (Eugene Volokh’s brief filed January 19, 2018)
- Opinion in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209 (1977), U.S. Supreme Court, May 23, 1977
- Opinion in Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), U.S. Supreme Court, May 30, 2006
- Opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), U.S. Supreme Court, January 21, 2010
- Sherman Antitrust Act, 26 Stat. 209, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1–7 (1890)
- Tillman Act, Pub. L. No. 59-36, 34 Stat. 864 (1907)
Our Interactive Constitution is the leading digital resource about the debates and text behind the greatest vision of human freedom in history, the U.S. Constitution. Here, scholars from across the legal and philosophical spectrum interact with each other to explore the meaning of each provision of our founding document.
First Amendment: Freedom Of Speech And The Press By Geoffrey R. Stone and Eugene Volokh
Matters of Debate
Fixing Free Speech by Geoffrey R. Stone
Frontiers for Free Speech by Eugene Volokh
Stay Connected and Learn More
Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr.
Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.
We the People is a member of Slate’s Panoply network. Check out the full roster of podcasts at Panoply.fm.
The Constitution Center is offering CLE credits for select America’s Town Hall programs! Click here to learn more.
And finally, despite our congressional charter, the National Constitution Center is a private nonprofit; we receive little government support, and we rely on the generosity of people around the country who are inspired by our nonpartisan mission of constitutional debate and education. Please consider becoming a member to support our work, including this podcast.
Questions or comments? We would love to hear from you. Contact the We the People team at [email protected]