Last year’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME (2018) is properly seen as a landmark ruling in the area of compelled speech (e.g., here and here), but it is more than that. By overruling Abood v. Detroit Board of Education(1977), the Supreme Court in Janus acknowledged that its extension of private-sector labor law precedents concerning union-security clauses to the public sector was erroneous. I have previously written about “the road to Abood” (here and here), and explained why the Court’s poorly-reasoned decisions under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) should not govern arrangements involving government employees. Justice Alito, who authored Janus and the decisions leading up to it, scathingly dissected the Court’s NLRA precedents, most of which were issued during the heyday of the Warren Court.
Recent News About U.S. Supreme Court View More
AUSTIN – Leading a coalition that includes 11 states, Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the U.S. Supreme Court asking the court to review the case of the two Oregon bakers last month.
WASHINGTON (Legal Newsline) - The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in a case that could end cy pres, the practice of steering money in class action settlements to organizations with absolutely no connection to the underlying lawsuit.