A U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with union fees could end a number of major unions that rely on forced dues to survive.
From The NY Post:
On Monday the US Supreme Court will hear Janus v. AFSCME. At issue are the constitutionality of laws in 22 states — including New York — that force public employees who do not want to belong to unions to pay unions “agency fees” for bargaining collectively on their behalf. The plaintiff — Illinois state worker Mark Janus — argues that agency fees violate his First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and association by compelling him to underwrite union political activity with which he disagrees.
If the court sides with Mr. Janus, it would spark the biggest change in government labor relations and state politics in New York since the passage of the Taylor Law in 1967, which first established ground rules for public employee unions.
Now, government unions in the state could lose 20 to 30 percent of their members and money.
Union strength would then reflect the workers who actually want its representation. The balance of power in state politics would shift.
The ability to collect agency fees has inflated the power of New York’s government unions. The unions argue that because all workers benefit from union representation, all workers should bear the costs. Following their logic the law allows public unions to set nonmember agency fees at nearly the same amount as union dues, which creates a strong incentive for most workers to join the union. Today, 67.4 percent of public employees in New York belong to unions, the highest rate in the country.
Membership translates into money. New York’s unions collect over $860 million a year from some 1 million government employees.
BREAKING: Supreme Court Hands Gun RIghts A Major Defeat!
The Supreme Court has rejected a bid to change California’s “cooling off period” to having the 10-day waiting period after gun sales not apply to already registered gun owners.
From The Hill: The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to hear a challenge a California law that requires there be a 10-day waiting period after all gun sales, even if the person is already a registered gun owner.
California's "cooling off period," is the second longest in the country, according to court documents and was enacted to give state authorities time to run a background check and give individuals who might want the firearm to harm themselves or others an opportunity to calm down.
Only eight other states and the District of Columbia have any kind of waiting period.
Read more: (Link: thehill.com)
This was also posted about 28 days ago.
Supreme Court Rules Against Surrogate Mother!
The Iowa Supreme Court has ruled against a surrogate mother, making surrogacy contracts enforceable.
This is the first time the state Supreme Court has made a ruling on this matter.
apnews.com reports: DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — The birth mother of an 18-month-old girl, who agreed to be paid as a surrogate to have the baby, is not legally the child’s parent, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday in an emotional case that concluded surrogacy contracts can be enforced in Iowa.
The ruling means the girl remains with the Cedar Rapids couple, the only parents she has known since leaving the hospital after birth.
It was the first time the state’s highest court has weighed whether surrogacy contracts can be enforced.
But the fight isn’t over. The birth mother plans to appeal port of the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
More @ (Link: apnews.com)
Please share and comment.