<!-- --><style type="text/css">@import url(https://www.blogger.com/static/v1/v-css/navbar/3334278262-classic.css); div.b-mobile {display:none;} </style> </head><body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d35140202\x26blogName\x3dTeachers+vs+Union\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://teachers-vs-union.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://teachers-vs-union.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-6791859879166174612', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>
0 comments | January 12, 2007 | 11:07 AM | posted by Mike Reitz

Washington Education Association president Charles Hasse predicted a victory for his union's right to spend dues without permission here and here.

Maybe he attended a different hearing than the one I witnessed. Or the entire Supreme Court news corps.

The Wall Street Journal reported, "Supreme Court justices indicated Wednesday they are inclined to uphold a Washington state law preventing unions from using fees they get from workers for political activities."

First Amendment Center legal correspondent Tony Mauro said the justices "appear unsympathetic" to the union's arguments.

Stephen Henderson with McClatchy Newspapers wrote, "The Supreme Court appeared ready Wednesday to reject claims that the First Amendment prohibits Washington state from forcing unions to get permission before spending some of the money they collect on political causes. Most oral arguments at the high court end ambiguously, with the justices leaving small hints about how they'll resolve tricky legal dilemmas. But once in a while, there are arguments where the only lingering question seems to be who'll write an opinion that reaches an obvious conclusion. "

Fox News' Megyn Kelly said a ruling against the union is "very likely."

The Seattle Times said "most of the justices seemed to side with Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna, who was representing the rights of the dissident teachers."

Meanwhile, the National Education Association labels teachers who opt-out of political spending as anti-child.

Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]


Post a Comment

<< Home