High-court ruling may set stage for more antiunion battles
Justices uphold a state law that limits unions' use of nonmembers' dues.
By Warren Richey | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitorfrom the June 15, 2007 edition
Page 1 of 3
WASHINGTON - Public-sector labor unions can be forced by a state government to first obtain permission of nonmembers of the union before using their fees to influence political campaigns.
In a unanimous ruling announced on Thursday, the US Supreme Court upheld a 1992 Washington State campaign-finance law that required unions to obtain the affirmative agreement of nonmembers that a portion of their fees could be used for politics.
The opinion comes in a case involving the 70,000-member Washington Education Association (WEA). At issue was whether the state could require the union to obtain explicit permission from some 3,000 nonunion members rather than the implied consent obtained under the union's preferred opt-out procedure.
The law at the center of the case has since been rewritten, eliminating the provision that required affirmative agreement. But the high court's holding may have broader significance beyond Washington State.
The decision comes amid an ongoing nationwide effort by several conservative groups to challenge the use of union treasury funds to influence political campaigns. The high-court decision only applies to nonmember fees at public-sector unions, but it may set the stage for broader antiunion battles in the future. For example, union opponents may seek to apply the same legal reasoning to union members who object to a portion of their union dues being used to support political causes they oppose.
In the Washington State case, the union had fought the new campaign-finance law in court, saying it violated its First Amendment right to advance the union's goals through political advocacy.
RSS feed
