Gregoire + Union vs. Teachers
The Evergreen Freedom Foundation has a video statement criticizing the Democratic governor of Washington for signing a bill from the Democrat-controlled legislature that allows the Democrat-controlled teacher union to use mandatory non-member union dues to get those same Democratic legislators and governor elected, without permission from the non-members.
Voters in Washington outlawed this practice. The state Supreme Court incredibly said the voter initiative violated the right of the union. The EFF appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, and the case has been heard, and most people think the SCOTUS will rule against the WA Court. So the Democrats, recognizing they are about to lose some free money for themselves, overturned the voter initiative, thereby nullifying the coming Supreme Court decision. (And they pretended that this was an "emergency" law, that the public's peace, health, or safety was imminently threatened unless this bill was passed, so that it could not be challenged by voters; this blatantly unconstitutional abuse, however, is not a matter for the SCOTUS, being purely a state constitution matter.)
Hopefully, the Supreme Court will hear the next suit the EFF brings, directly challenging the authority of the state to force employees to do this. The comments the judges made during the testimony on the current case was widely seen as not just against the notion that the law banning the practice was unconstitutional, but also seemed to be against the practice itself.
I would also not be surprised to see one or more justice reference this new law in the decision, and perhaps signal their view of it.
See http://www.teachers-vs-union.org/ for more information. This is really one of the most blatantly corrupt bills I've ever seen. Literally, one political party is forcing government employees to give money to get that party elected.
Voters in Washington outlawed this practice. The state Supreme Court incredibly said the voter initiative violated the right of the union. The EFF appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, and the case has been heard, and most people think the SCOTUS will rule against the WA Court. So the Democrats, recognizing they are about to lose some free money for themselves, overturned the voter initiative, thereby nullifying the coming Supreme Court decision. (And they pretended that this was an "emergency" law, that the public's peace, health, or safety was imminently threatened unless this bill was passed, so that it could not be challenged by voters; this blatantly unconstitutional abuse, however, is not a matter for the SCOTUS, being purely a state constitution matter.)
Hopefully, the Supreme Court will hear the next suit the EFF brings, directly challenging the authority of the state to force employees to do this. The comments the judges made during the testimony on the current case was widely seen as not just against the notion that the law banning the practice was unconstitutional, but also seemed to be against the practice itself.
I would also not be surprised to see one or more justice reference this new law in the decision, and perhaps signal their view of it.
See http://www.teachers-vs-union.org/ for more information. This is really one of the most blatantly corrupt bills I've ever seen. Literally, one political party is forcing government employees to give money to get that party elected.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
Leave a comment