Justices reject Alaska state employee union dues dispute
on Jan 16, 2024 at 10:45 am
Updated on Jan. 17 at 6:52 p.m.
In 2018, in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, & Municipal Employees, the Supreme Court held that government employees who are represented by a union but do not belong to that union cannot be required to pay a fee to cover the union’s costs to negotiate a contract that applies to all employees. On Tuesday, the justices rejected a request to decide whether the state of Alaska can decline to deduct union dues from a state employee’s paycheck unless it has the employee’s clear consent to do so.
After the Alaska Supreme Court held that Janus does not require the state to obtain consent, the state came to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking review of that decision. (The union contended, and all three state courts agreed, that the membership and dues-deduction forms that its members signed provided that consent.) As part of a list of orders issued on Tuesday from the justices’ private conference on Friday, the justices denied review without comment.
The justices added five new cases to their docket for the 2023-24 term on Friday afternoon, so it was not surprising that they did not grant review in any new cases on Tuesday.
The justices once again did not act on a request by a group of parents and alumni to weigh in on the constitutionality of the admissions policy at a prestigious public magnet school in the Washington, D.C., suburbs. The justices considered Coalition for TJ v. Fairfax County School Board last week for the third consecutive conference, but it did not appear on either Friday’s or Tuesday’s list of orders.
The justices will meet again to consider more petitions for review on Friday, Jan. 19.
This article was originally published at Howe on the Court.