Justices to hear case over fees to unions

WASHINGTON» The Supreme Court could deal a sharp blow to the unions that represent millions of teachers and other public employees, announcing Thursday it will consider striking down the mandatory fees that support collective bargaining.

The justices will hear the case of Mark Janus, an Illinois state employee who objects to paying fees to the union, which represents 35,000 state workers.

The decision, due by next June, could prove a costly setback for publicsector unions in 22 states, where such fees are authorized by law.

With smaller numbers, public employee unions would lose some of the political power that has made them major forces in some states, such as California, Illinois and New York.

The nation’s four largest public-sector unions — the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, the Service Employees International Union and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees — sharply criticized the case, calling it “a blatantly political and well-funded plot to use the highest court in the land to further rig the economic rules against everyday working people.”

Early last year, the court’s conservatives were poised to strike down these so-called “fair share” fees in a suit brought by a California schoolteacher. But Justice Antonin Scalia died in February, leaving the court split 4-4 and unable to decide the case of Friedrichs vs. the California Teachers Association.

Now, the court has agreed to hear a new case presenting the same issue. And this time, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch can — and most likely will — supply the fifth vote for a conservative ruling.

The union fees case presents the question of whether to overturn a 40year-old ruling. In that case, Abood vs. Detroit, the Supreme Court said it was reasonable to require all employees, not just union members, to pay to support the cost of bargaining because all of them benefited. By law, the unions are required to represent all employees, including by handling their grievances.

In recent years, the court’s conservatives, led by Justice Samuel A. Alito, have called the Abood ruling “questionable” and said that forcing public employees to fund a private group violates their freespeech rights under the First Amendment.

Disagreeing, the four liberal justices have said the court should leave it to the states to set their laws on unions and public employees.