Harris v. Quinn
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Jan 21, 2014
|Jun 30, 2014||5-4||Alito||OT 2013|
Disclosure: Disclosure: Kevin Russell of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Harris.
Holding: The First Amendment prohibits the collection of an agency fee from the plaintiffs in this case, home health care providers who do not wish to join or support a union.
Plain English Summary:
Judgment: Reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 30, 2014. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion in which Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, and Justice Sotomayor joined.
- Harris v. Quinn Symposium: Court departs from federalism, First Amendment jurisprudence (Catherine Fisk)
- Harris v. Quinn symposium: A quiet blockbuster? (Tom McCarthy and Samuel B. Gedge)
- Harris v. Quinn symposium: Decision will affect workers & limit states’ ability to effectively manage their workforces (Charlotte Garden)
- Harris v. Quinn symposium: A preview of things to come (Terry Pell)
- Harris v. Quinn Symposium: Abood and the limits of cognitive dissonance (Jason Walta)
- Harris v. Quinn Symposium: The coming conflict in public employee speech law and the immediate risks to people with disabilities (Samuel Bagenstos)
- Harris v. Quinn Symposium: Abood and the walking dead (John Eastman)
- Opinion analysis: A ruling inviting a plea to overrule (Lyle Denniston)
- A "view" from the Court: Justice Alito has his day in finale (Mark Walsh)
- Argument recap: Public employee unionism under fire (Lyle Denniston)
- Argument preview: Is Abood in trouble? (Lyle Denniston)