Abood Overruled! Public Sector Unions Can No Longer Compel Dues Payments

 

This is a dagger in the heart of the ever expanding state and long overdue. Together with NIFLA v. Bacerra it’s a critical reaffirmation of our First Amendment rights of speech and conscience and a great day for the Constitution. It is darkened only by the sputteringly inexplicable fact that both decisions were 5-4.

The fact that four justices on our Supreme Court could dissent from these decisions is sad and terrifying. It shows us how close to the edge we were. Thank god for Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump, and Neil Gorsuch, who together preserved at least a narrow majority on the Court with fealty to the Constitution.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 62 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    CNBC reports Anthony Kennedy is retiring. 

    <prayers> Please lord, let President Trump get it right.

    If so, 6-3 becomes the new 5-4 to liberals.

    If Notorious RBG departs, the same to 7-2.

     

    • #31
  2. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Matt Upton (View Comment):

    I’m not surprised at the 5-4 split for the travel ban case given the reasoning of the dissent. If I squint, I can at least understand the legal perspective (even if I profoundly disagree). The public sector union ruling, however, is just shameful. Unions extracting fees for benefits from a service you didn’t ask for that go towards causes you disagree with is about as ethical as the bum who squeegees your windshield in stopped traffic without asking.

    Do you mean the ruling or the dissent is shameful?

    • #32
  3. Sweezle Inactive
    Sweezle
    @Sweezle

    Voting for Trump was definitely worthwhile! And now we get another Conservative SCOTUS.

    • #33
  4. The Scarecrow Thatcher
    The Scarecrow
    @TheScarecrow

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Matt Upton (View Comment):

    I’m not surprised at the 5-4 split for the travel ban case given the reasoning of the dissent. If I squint, I can at least understand the legal perspective (even if I profoundly disagree). The public sector union ruling, however, is just shameful. Unions extracting fees for benefits from a service you didn’t ask for that go towards causes you disagree with is about as ethical as the bum who squeegees your windshield in stopped traffic without asking.

    That’s a really good analogy. Except that even the bum doesn’t use the power of the state to take your money at gunpoint, and then use it to advocate for more money for bums.

    Maybe the analogy should be that the bum squeegees your winshield without asking, makes it dirtier, then expects you to pay him for the service.

    And you to pay up without complaining.

    • #34
  5. The Scarecrow Thatcher
    The Scarecrow
    @TheScarecrow

    They will all start twisting and spitting, trying to insist that it’s only fair that Trump nominate a liberal candidate – to preserve “balance” or something, without coming right out and saying it.  Or perhaps they will come right out and say it.

    Trump will not cave. He will stick to the list.  He might be the only guy in office at the time who will endure their BS, give it right back to them.  Maybe some NTers will conclude that, on balance, it was worth it  to have him as president, for a conservative supreme court.

    This is going to be fun to watch.

    • #35
  6. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    They will all start twisting and spitting, trying to insist that it’s only fair that Trump nominate a liberal candidate – to preserve “balance” or something, without coming right out and saying it. Or perhaps they will come right out and say it.

    Trump will not cave. He will stick to the list. He might be the only guy in office at the time who will endure their BS, give it right back to them. Maybe some NTers will conclude that, on balance, it was worth it to have him as president, for a conservative supreme court.

    This is going to be fun to watch.

    Sounds like it’s time for Mueller to make his move (if he has anything that the Media Matters crowd would be willing to run with).  

    • #36
  7. Matt Upton Inactive
    Matt Upton
    @MattUpton

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    Do you mean the ruling or the dissent is shameful?

    I should have been clear: the *dissent* for the union case is shameful. 

    • #37
  8. Matt Upton Inactive
    Matt Upton
    @MattUpton

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Matt Upton (View Comment):

    I’m not surprised at the 5-4 split for the travel ban case given the reasoning of the dissent. If I squint, I can at least understand the legal perspective (even if I profoundly disagree). The public sector union ruling, however, is just shameful. Unions extracting fees for benefits from a service you didn’t ask for that go towards causes you disagree with is about as ethical as the bum who squeegees your windshield in stopped traffic without asking.

    That’s a really good analogy. Except that even the bum doesn’t use the power of the state to take your money at gunpoint, and then use it to advocate for more money for bums.

    To be honest it would be better if the union dues just went to booze and drugs, becoming a closer analogue to the bum. 

    • #38
  9. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    I feel like someone threw America a surprise party!

    “What the…? Hey, Constitution!! Nice to see you again! You guys are so thoughtful. And there’s cake, too?? You shouldn’t have… More please.”

    • #39
  10. Dr. Bastiat Member
    Dr. Bastiat
    @drbastiat

    Cato Rand: The fact that four justices on our Supreme Court could dissent from these decisions is sad and terrifying.

    So, so true…

    • #40
  11. TRibbey Inactive
    TRibbey
    @TRibbey

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Good Lord . . .

    There you have it. The Janus decision is a sign of CHRISTIAN AUTOCRACY!

    This from a law professor.

    Deus vult …

    • #41
  12. Mark Camp Member
    Mark Camp
    @MarkCamp

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    I’d like to hear from liberal intellectuals why you thought the ruling was Constitutionally sound.

    Sorry, but I can’t help. 1) I’m a liberal but not an intellectual. 2) I thought the ruling was right, except for not going so far as to abolish public employee unions altogether. (I don’t like all the Republican bashing of real labor unions that we sometimes get, though.)

    Thanks, R.  I won’t take time right now to talk about these two very interesting points you bring up.

    I’ve read the opinions, but not carefully all the way through.  There were so many issues to be addressed which I’d never thought of!  The problem is that, while I was made aware of lots of issues that matter to any true American liberal, and were addressed, I was really looking for the arguments on one specific issue which I had thought was the heart of the case.

    A thought experiment will explain my question.

    Suppose the union in the complaint had a consistently reliable policy: we will only do one thing, negotiate for the best possible wages and working conditions for the employees we represent.

    Would the Court’s decision have been the same?

    Did the plaintiff claim that being required to financially support speech whose only purpose was to get him higher wages was violating his Constitutional rights?  I couldn’t tell.

    • #42
  13. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    CNBC reports Anthony Kennedy is retiring.

    <prayers> Please lord, let President Trump get it right.

    If so, 6-3 becomes the new 5-4 to liberals.

    If Notorious RBG departs, the same to 7-2.

     

    He’s shown every inclination to defer to Leonard Leo, so we should be fine.  A constitutionalist majority on the Supreme Court has been Leonard Leo’s life’s work.  He isn’t going soft or squishy.

    • #43
  14. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):

    They will all start twisting and spitting, trying to insist that it’s only fair that Trump nominate a liberal candidate – to preserve “balance” or something, without coming right out and saying it. Or perhaps they will come right out and say it.

    Trump will not cave. He will stick to the list. He might be the only guy in office at the time who will endure their BS, give it right back to them. Maybe some NTers will conclude that, on balance, it was worth it to have him as president, for a conservative supreme court.

    This is going to be fun to watch.

    We’re already seeing calls to wait until after the mid-terms.  As if Barack Obama and Harry Reid would have done that.  )-

    • #44
  15. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I feel like someone threw America a surprise party!

    “What the…? Hey, Constitution!! Nice to see you again! You guys are so thoughtful. And there’s cake, too?? You shouldn’t have… More please.”

    Today really does feel like a surprise party, doesn’t it.  I’m walking on air.  SO MUCH WINNING!  God, maybe I’ll even vote for the orange buffoon next time.

    • #45
  16. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Well said! I join the conclusion of this post completely.  Well written Cato Rand

    • #46
  17. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    CNBC reports Anthony Kennedy is retiring. Now if only RBG would follow suit.

    A million, million likes and from your keyboard Cato Rand to God’s eyes!

    • #47
  18. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I feel like someone threw America a surprise party!

    “What the…? Hey, Constitution!! Nice to see you again! You guys are so thoughtful. And there’s cake, too?? You shouldn’t have… More please.”

    Today really does feel like a surprise party, doesn’t it. I’m walking on air. SO MUCH WINNING! God, maybe I’ll even vote for the orange buffoon next time.

    Just think! With Kennedy’s retirement, we can reverse Obergefell!

    • #48
  19. Hypatia Member
    Hypatia
    @

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Cato Rand: Thank god for Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump, and Neil Gorsuch

    Hear, hear!

    Exactly!  The day the GOP grew a pair and got Gorsuch in,  I was ecstatic.  They’ve gotta do it again now, and get someone from Trump’s great list appointed.   Do whatever you have to do–this is critical! Our America is on life support! 

    • #49
  20. Hypatia Member
    Hypatia
    @

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I feel like someone threw America a surprise party!

    “What the…? Hey, Constitution!! Nice to see you again! You guys are so thoughtful. And there’s cake, too?? You shouldn’t have… More please.”

    Yes!  But while we’re all celebrating, are RINOs plotting to pass a general amnesty bill?  No, we can’t get too drunk…

    • #50
  21. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Cato Rand: The fact that four justices on our Supreme Court could dissent from these decisions is sad and terrifying.

    So, so true…

    Although I sometimes jest that they cannot read and understand the meaning of the U.S. Constitution and the founders’ intent, I think it’s more a case that they just don’t care because they think they have a better idea.

    • #51
  22. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Cato Rand: The fact that four justices on our Supreme Court could dissent from these decisions is sad and terrifying.

    So, so true…

    Although I sometimes jest that they cannot read and understand the meaning of the U.S. Constitution and the founders’ intent, I think it’s more a case that they just don’t care because they think they have a better idea.

    The Left isn’t exactly known for its intellectual humility…

    • #52
  23. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I feel like someone threw America a surprise party!

    “What the…? Hey, Constitution!! Nice to see you again! You guys are so thoughtful. And there’s cake, too?? You shouldn’t have… More please.”

    Today really does feel like a surprise party, doesn’t it. I’m walking on air. SO MUCH WINNING! God, maybe I’ll even vote for the orange buffoon next time.

    Just think! With Kennedy’s retirement, we can reverse Obergefell!

    Heck yea.  And Lawrence.  We can lock up the faggots again!  (Needless to say, Obergefell is not the reason I’m looking forward to Mr. Justice Kennedy’s retirement).

    • #53
  24. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Cato Rand: The fact that four justices on our Supreme Court could dissent from these decisions is sad and terrifying.

    So, so true…

    Although I sometimes jest that they cannot read and understand the meaning of the U.S. Constitution and the founders’ intent, I think it’s more a case that they just don’t care because they think they have a better idea.

    I don’t think there’s any doubt about this.  I think some of them would tell you so if you asked.

    • #54
  25. TheSockMonkey Inactive
    TheSockMonkey
    @TheSockMonkey

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Cato Rand: The fact that four justices on our Supreme Court could dissent from these decisions is sad and terrifying.

    So, so true…

    Although I sometimes jest that they cannot read and understand the meaning of the U.S. Constitution and the founders’ intent, I think it’s more a case that they just don’t care because they think they have a better idea.

    A better idea, for “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

    • #55
  26. TheSockMonkey Inactive
    TheSockMonkey
    @TheSockMonkey

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I feel like someone threw America a surprise party!

    “What the…? Hey, Constitution!! Nice to see you again! You guys are so thoughtful. And there’s cake, too?? You shouldn’t have… More please.”

    But it’s strictly heterosexual cake.

    • #56
  27. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    TheSockMonkey (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I feel like someone threw America a surprise party!

    “What the…? Hey, Constitution!! Nice to see you again! You guys are so thoughtful. And there’s cake, too?? You shouldn’t have… More please.”

    But it’s strictly heterosexual cake.

    It’s heterosexual cake, but it identifies as a jelly donut.

    • #57
  28. TheSockMonkey Inactive
    TheSockMonkey
    @TheSockMonkey

    Cato Rand (View Comment):
    It’s heterosexual cake, but it identifies as a jelly donut.

    What bravery!

    • #58
  29. genferei Member
    genferei
    @genferei

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Suppose the union in the complaint had a consistently reliable policy: we will only do one thing, negotiate for the best possible wages and working conditions for the employees we represent.

    Would the Court’s decision have been the same?

    I think so, yes. Because speech about wages and working conditions of public servants inherently involve government resources, and are therefore political.

    • #59
  30. Mark Wilson Inactive
    Mark Wilson
    @MarkWilson

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Good Lord . . .

    There you have it. The Janus decision is a sign of CHRISTIAN AUTOCRACY!

    This from a law professor.

     

    What does that even mean?

    I think it means Christ becomes a dictator?

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.