U.S. Supreme Court
The case stems from a Washington law, enacted in 1992 as part of a voter initiative, that requires unions to obtain each nonmember's affirmative authorization in order to use their union "agency shop fees" for political purposes. In essence, Washington has adopted an "opt-in" mechanism: Dues-paying members must affirmatively consent to the union's use of their fees for political purposes. The state supreme court struck down the law and held that it "violates the First Amendment rights of the Washington Education Association." Because of the widespread nature of the problem of union collection and misuse of dues for political purposes, NFIB was one of the lead players in pushing for the initiative. If the court sides with the unions, its ruling could open the door to labor initiatives to roll back limits on the use of union dues.
Status: DECIDED. Amicus brief filed in support of Davenport and other non-union employees Nov. 13, 2006. Oral argument held Jan. 10, 2007. On June 14, 2007, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the Washington law did not violate the first amendment.
