The Supreme Court on Tuesday denied the plaintiffs in the case Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association a rehearing, ending the possibly that the court will re-examine whether public sector unions should have the right to force payment from workers who do not wish to be members.
The case had once been one of the most high-profile of the Supreme Court’s current term, with many legal observers thinking it could fundamentally rewrite labor law, weakening unions in the process. Instead, the court announced in April it was deadlocked, 4-4, in the case. That meant a lower court ruling upholding current law allowing unions to demand the fees would stand.
Since the court had not actually ruled on the matter, the plaintiffs requested a re-hearing. They hoped that by the time the court would re-hear it in its next session, the Senate would have confirmed a new ninth justice to replace the late Antonin Scalia, preventing another 4-4 split. On Tuesday the court turned that request down.
California public school teacher Rebecca Friedrichs, the lead plaintiff in the case, said her heart was “broken” over the news. “I am grateful to the thousands of teachers and parents who have stood beside my fellow plaintiffs and me. We have accomplished much and brought national attention to an issue that strikes at the heart of every American’s right to free speech. This battle for liberty cannot be abandoned,” she said.
The case involved whether the court should overturn a 1977 precedent called Abood v. Detroit Board of Education that said that government entities could enter into labor contracts that require their workers to have to either join a union or pay it a regular fee, called an “agency fee.” The plaintiffs in Friedrichs argued that violated dissenting workers’ rights. Unions countered that they were owed the fees since they are obligated to represent all workers in collective bargaining.
The court’s oral arguments in January indicated there may have been a majority to overturn Abood, which would have been a major blow to public-sector unions by depriving them a major revenue source. That apparently changed when Scalia, the court’s leading conservative, suddenly died in February.
The California Teachers Association tweeted: “No Do-Over for #Friedrichs: SCOTUS Won’t Hear Attack on Labor Unions Again.”
Terry Pell, president of the Center for Individual Rights, the libertarian legal group that was representing Friedrichs, said they were greatly disappointed. “Today’s decision was not a decision on the merits of our case nor was it accompanied by an opinion. We continue to believe that forcing individuals to subsidize political speech with which they disagree violates the First Amendment,” Pell said.
