U.S. Supreme Court ruling a loss for Utah's unions

[Omaha Steve]

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_11777199

Paycheck protection » Ruling upholds law preventing automatic deductions.

By Sheena Mcfarland And Robert Gehrke

The Salt Lake Tribune
Posted: 02/24/2009 07:05:02 PM MST

Utah's teachers union, which flexed its political muscle in the 2007 voucher wars, may find itself substantially weakened by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that will limit how it can collect Political Action Committee contributions from its members.

The high court ruled Tuesday to uphold a nearly identical "paycheck protection" law in Idaho that prevents unions from collecting automatic deductions for their PACs.

"Idaho's law does not restrict political speech, but rather declines to promote that speech by allowing public employee checkoffs for political activities," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the court's 6-3 decision. "Such a decision is reasonable in light of the state's interest in avoiding the appearance that carrying out the public's business is tainted by partisan political activity."

The 10th District Court, which covers Utah, waited to act on Utah's 2001 law to see how the Supreme Court would rule on Idaho's law, which is part of the 9th District Court.

Vik Arnold, director of government relations and political actions, called the ruling "disappointing."

"We will do what we need to do to make sure that teachers' voices will be heard on behalf of their students and the profession," he said.

FULL story at link.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

1. Same in Idaho...

Posted this in GD (aka "All Jindal, ALL THE TIME) today....sank like a BOULDER (sigh)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5132745&mesg_id=5132745

Supreme Court: State can stop union political deductions

By JESSE J. HOLLAND – 21 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a state law banning local governments from letting workers use payroll deductions to fund their union's political activities, a decision that could strike at organized labor's ability to raise funds at local levels.

Five labor unions and the Idaho state AFL-CIO successfully argued in lower federal courts that a 2003 Idaho law forcing cities, counties and school districts to eliminate a payroll deduction funding union political action committees violated the First Amendment.

snip

The unions did not appeal the elimination of the payroll deduction for state-level employees, and "we are aware of no case suggesting that a different analysis applies under the First Amendment depending on the level of government affected," said Roberts, who was joined in his opinion by Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony M. Kennedy and Samuel A. Alito.

"The ban on political payroll deductions furthers Idaho's interest in separating the operations of government from partisan politics," the chief justice said. "That interest extends to all public employers at whatever level of government."

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in a separate opinion, agreed with the majority, but for a different reason writing "that, in the context here, the Constitution compels no distinction between state and local governmental entities."

snip

Justices John Paul Stevens and David H. Souter dissented, saying the law was clearly aimed at stopping the political speech of unions.

The new language was placed inside a law "that deals with unions, the statute amended regulates unions, and all this legislation is placed in the state's labor law certification," Souter said. "Union speech and nothing else, seems to have been on the legislative mind."

More at link: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iJYa-V8wkGBqZjrLYRQ6YzGJgtxAD96I5LL04