The ruling against SEIU today probably means that the court will rule against Obamacare.

[underpants]

First of all courts for years have held that these fees are okay because without paying these fees non-members are "free riders" and get collective bargaining for free.

In this ruling the court countered what they established in Citizens United. Coporations can contribute money to political causes (not campaigns or parties) in unlimited amounts with no regard for shareholders' concerns OR (not pointed out in the NPR piece) taxpayers' concerns for corporations receiving tax incentives like Walmart not paying property tax as part of their business model. Unions, after this ruling, can't contribute money to political causes (not campaigns or parties) because of the concerns of non-union members.

The kicker is that in Citizens United the court went beyond the case to state that the contributions do not have to disclosed. In this case the court went beyond to say that there has to be an "opt in" (not an "opt out&quot which was not part of the case. Breyer apparently gave an oral dissent today railing the court for adding on to this ruling when the parties had not been able to air their side.

What this signals is that this court is so partisan and out of control that Scalia is willing to rule against himself in Raich v. Gonzales and overturn Obamacare.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

1. Unions can still contribute and they can still collect special fees

They just have to give non-members notice and those non-members have to opt-in.

And I don't know if partisan covers it as the ruling was 7-2.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

2. Maybe

The mandate might well get struck down. If it does get struck down, I just hope that the rest of the law remains intact and that we can get a Congress in next year that can come up with a suitable workaround.

Maybe they will make there be an "opt-out" of PPACA or something (i.e. no health insurance, no subsidies, etc.)?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

7. If

you're looking for the Humor forum it's under Offbeat

[Proud Liberal Dem]

11. I'll keep that in mind. Thanks!

I guess my last post did seem a bit.........fevered.

[SoutherDem]

3. Does it appear the SCOTUS is preparing for a possible Obama second term?

They have been making some really right wing decisions. They not only are voting for the right but helping finance them. Or, is the right wing financing them?

If Romney wins and he gets to put a couple of justices on the court I hate to see what is coming next.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

4. "Baking into the cake"?

I think that's what the right-wing teabagger Republicans want to do with this country if/when they get total control of it again- they know that, demographically, their days are numbered but they can still set things in motion to make their ideology prevail despite of their absence. Think what they did to the USPS but with the entire country. I think that this is ultimately what their restructuring of things like Medicare is about.

[madrchsod]

5. totally fair ruling by the court.

[Lurks Often]

6. I don't think you read the decision correctly

"By a vote of seven to two, the Court reversed the decision of the Ninth Circuit and remanded the case for further consideration. It held that the case is not moot; five members of the Court further held that the First Amendment does not allow a public-sector union to require objecting non-members to pay a special fee for the purposes of financing the union’s political and ideological activities. "

http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/06/details-on-todays-opinions-21/#more-147148

[jeff47]

8. Except they were "emergency fees" for political activity.

They were explicitly earmarked for political activity, not collective bargaining. So the "free rider" argument doesn't apply.

The ruling does not apply to "normal" union dues. Just these special fees.

[jaysunb]

9. I've long held that Scalia would not rule against

the mandate based on his "Raich v. Gonzales" opinion....I hope I'm still right, but your comment about the, partisan and out of control of the current court leaves me wondering.

[TeamPooka]

10. You doubted...?

the political hacks on the right wing court to not taer this baby down?
Seriously?

[badtoworse]

12. It was a 7 - 2 decision. That is not partisan.