Supreme Court says that home health care workers do not have to pay dues. CNN's Jeffery Tuben says it only applies to home health workers so it is not as paid as it could have been.
Jonathan Turley believes it is a greater blow to unions than Jeffery Tuben does because home workers were growth area for unions.
Richard Wolf of USA writes Supreme Court issues narrow ruling against labor unions
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 along ideological lines Monday that home-care workers in Illinois do not have to pay dues to public employees unions.
The opinion by Justice Samuel Alito was a narrow loss for organized labor. It did not overrule the court's "agency shop" precedent applying to all public employee unions.
The challenge to the mandatory union dues, brought by eight home-care workers in Illinois, represented the biggest labor case to come before the court this term -- putting at potential risk the future viability of public employee unions.
For decades, the law has allowed unions to collect dues from all private or public employees they are required to represent. Those who object don't have to contribute to political or lobbying activities, but they must chip in for the unions' efforts in fighting for better wages, benefits and working conditions.
The home-care workers in Harris v. Quinn served individuals with disabilities through the federal-state Medicaid program. They argued they should not have to pay dues for the state's contract with the Service Employees International Union, even though the union is required to represent them and they benefit from its services.
Justice Antonin Scalia had expressed concern that letting public employees bail out would deprive the unions of funds needed to carry out their legally required duties.
7:28 AM PT: Also, CNN reports the SCOTUS issued a narrow ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby, however, Jefferey Tuben say the ruling only applied to certain "closely held companies" not those with diverse stockholders.
Hobby Lobby's owners are evangelical Christians. It is not clear whether this is another constraint on who else it may apply to.
7:34 AM PT: Bill Chappell reports
Bill Chappell reports Companies Can Refuse To Cover Contraception, Supreme Court Says
The Supreme Court has ruled that Hobby Lobby and other closely held for-profit corporations can opt out of the Affordable Care Act's provisions for no-cost prescription contraception in most health insurance plans. The companies' owners had objected on the grounds of religious freedom.
The case, Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby, is perhaps the most important decision of the high court's term, legal analysts say. Burwell, you'll recall, is Sylvia Mathews Burwell, who became secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services early this month.
Here's a quick summary of the issue from NPR's Nina Totenberg:
"In enacting the ACA, Congress required large employers to provide basic preventive care for employees. That includes all birth control methods approved by the FDA. Under the law, religious non-profits were exempted from this reuirement, but for-profit corporations were not.
"The Hobby Lobby corporation, which has 500 stores and 16,000 employees, objects to some forms of birth control on religious grounds.
"But the government points to a long line of cases holding that for-profit companies may not use religion as a basis for failing to comply with generally applicable laws."
Hobby Lobby and other companies that don't want to cover contraception cited the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, which "provides that the government 'shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion' unless that burden is the least restrictive means to further a compelling governmental interest," says the overview of the case by SCOTUSBlog.
7:42 AM PT: Here is a syllabus of the Hobby Lobby decision. < ahref="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf">Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2013 1
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES, ET AL. v. HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC.,
ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE TENTH CIRCUIT
No. 13–354. Argued March 25, 2014—Decided June 30, 2014*
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993
7:55 AM PT: ScotusBlog: Harris v. Quinn