A dark cloud that's loomed large over public-sector unions has cleared away-for now.
The Supreme Court split 4-4 Tuesday in its decision on Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a case centering on the legality of "fair-share" fees, which non-union members are required to pay to cover collective bargaining costs.
And while the decision came down Tuesday, Friedrichs's fate was largely sealed when Justice Antonin Scalia unexpectedly died in February, ending the conservative majority on the high court.
Predictably, labor leaders were relieved, yet reserved.
"Millions of working people who understand the importance of their unions in bettering their lives and the well-being of their communities are breathing a sigh of relief," American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten said in a statement. "Even so, we know this fight is far from over. Just as our opponents won't stop coming after us, we will continue full speed ahead in our effort to mobilize our members and their neighbors around a shared vision to reclaim the promise of America."
The case was highly controversial. Labor advocates contended that fair-share fees are crucial to keeping public-sector unions afloat; conservatives say it's an affront to free speech. Friedrichs was pushed by right-wing legal activists in an attempt to overturn the 40 years of legal precedent that stood between public-sector unions and more restrictive right-to-work laws.
As the case moved through the federal courts, the larger public sector unions scrambled to shore up the rank-and-file and recruit non-members. But despite last-ditch efforts, labor leaders like Service Employees International Union President Mary Kay Henry were less than optimistic.
"By next summer, we're going to lose another two million because of a Supreme Court case for the public sector where public sector workers' organizations will no longer be allowed to have union shops," Henry said. "Everyone will be a voluntary member. And I think that means another chunk of the movement will be gone."
But that all turned on a dime with Justice Scalia's death. Now public-sector unions are suffering from strategic whiplash and are likely still sorting out how to proceed now that the current legal threat has been thwarted.
However, Friedrichs isn't the only case attacking fair-share fees, and unions more broadly. There are a handful of similar cases currently working through the courts that focus on the same argument as Friedrichs-that mandatory union fees are unconstitutional. Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner, who launched one of those cases, said yesterday that he fully expects his case to reach the Supreme Court.
Those circumstances make the current Supreme Court confirmation battle all the more important. President Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, is largely viewed as a pro-labor judge who would hesitate to overturn 40 years of precedent.
If Garland is able to win confirmation from the Senate or if a Democratic president gets a liberal justice on the high court, then unions will rest easier with a liberal Supreme Court majority and largely pro-labor lower courts.
The real danger for public-sector unions lies with another scenario: a Republican who captures the White House in 2016 and secures the confirmation of a conservative justice, a development that would invite a fresh slate of anti-worker cases.
