U.S. Supreme Court 

Supreme Court Clears Path for Michigan Childcare Providers to Win Back Money Illegally Seized by Union Officials

News Release

Supreme Court Clears Path for Michigan Childcare Providers to Win Back Money Illegally Seized by Union Officials

UAW and AFSCME took in over $4 million from 50,000 childcare providers in unconstitutional scheme, but lower courts blocked lawsuit to return money from unions

Washington, DC (July 1, 2014) – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it has granted, vacated, and remanded a federal lawsuit which seeks to require that Michigan's 50,000 home childcare providers receive a refund of union dues illegally taken during a now-defunct unionization scheme.

National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys argue that all of Michigan's home childcare providers should be entitled to refunds of the union dues collected after former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm and a UAW and AFSCME coalition, the Child Care Providers Together Michigan (CCPTM) union, colluded to force the state's providers into union ranks against their will.

Michigan home childcare providers Carrie Schlaud, Diana Orr, Peggy Mashke, and Edward and Nora Gross originally filed a federal class-action lawsuit against Granholm and the CCPTM union for designating home childcare providers who receive state funds as public employees solely for the purpose of forcing them to accept the CCPTM's "representation" and pay union dues.

Click here to read the full release.

U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Illinois Homecare Provider Unionization Scheme

News Release

U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Illinois Homecare Provider Unionization Scheme

National Right to Work Foundation attorneys defend home-based personal care providers forced into union ranks

Washington, DC (June 30, 2014) – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in a case over whether Illinois homecare providers can be forced into union ranks against their will.

The case, Harris v. Quinn, is a class-action lawsuit argued by National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys and filed by Pam Harris and seven other Illinois care providers after Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed an executive order rendering them vulnerable to unwanted union organizing.

Click here to read the full release.

Supreme Court Dismisses Union-Backed Petition to Overturn Organizing Case

News Release

Supreme Court Dismisses Union-Backed Petition to Overturn Organizing Case

Right to Work Foundation-won Eleventh Circuit ruling stands, putting at risk backroom deals between companies and aggressive union organizers

Washington, DC (December 10, 2013) – Today, the United States Supreme Court announced that it "dismissed as improvidently granted" a union appeal of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in Mulhall v. UNITE HERE.

The order leaves intact a significant victory for National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys and a Florida Mardi Gras Gaming employee in which the appeals court ruled that the company's organizing assistance to union officials could be unlawful "thing[s] of value." Consequently, as Jack Goldsmith, the Henry L. Shattuck Professor at Harvard Law School, today said about the Mulhall dismissal in a blog, "as long as CA11's decision stands, the specter of expensive and difficult litigation will hover over neutrality/bargaining agreements in many circuits, and will indeed chill the making of those agreements."

Click here to read the full release.

Former Rhode Island Nurse Files Brief in Obama NLRB "Recess Appointment" Supreme Court Case

News Release

Former Rhode Island Nurse Files Brief in Obama NLRB "Recess Appointment" Supreme Court Case

Invalid Labor Board negates Supreme Court's restrictions on union bosses' power to force workers to pay for union politics

Washington, D.C. (November 25, 2013) – A former Warwick, Rhode Island nurse has filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in the high-profile legal battle over President Barack Obama's recent purported recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Jeanette Geary filed the amicus brief today with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

Foundation staff attorneys argue in the brief that the recess appointments are unconstitutional because the U.S. Senate was still in session per the body's rules. Therefore the President could not make the appointments to the NLRB without Senate confirmation.

Click here to read the full release.

Airline Workers’ Federal Class-Action Suit Seeks to Ground Union Boss Forced Dues Powers

News Release

Airline Workers' Federal Class-Action Suit Seeks to Ground Union Boss Forced Dues Powers

Relying on landmark Knox Supreme Court decision, workers seek to roll back union boss power to collect forced dues

Dallas, TX (June 27, 2013) – Six airline workers have filed a federal class-action lawsuit that seeks to expand workers' right to refrain from paying union dues in light of last year's U.S. Supreme Court decision in Knox v. SEIU Local 1000.

Five American Eagle Airlines baggage handlers from Texas and a Southwest Airlines flight attendant from Maryland filed the lawsuit with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Dallas.

The workers all are not members of the Transport Workers Union of America (TWUA). However, the workers must still accept the TWUA hierarchy as their monopoly bargaining representative even though they are prohibited from voting on the union's bargaining agreement or participating in union meetings. Additionally, federal labor law empowers union officials to extract union dues and fees from the workers as payment for their so-called "representation." If the workers refused to pay union dues or fees, they would be terminated from their jobs.

Last year, the Supreme Court suggested in its Foundation-won Knox v. SEIU ruling that it was ready to reassess whether union bosses' forced dues powers, which it called "something of an anomaly," violate workers' First Amendment rights. Responding to that suggestion, the workers' lawsuit seeks to eliminate forced unionism in America.

Click here to read the full release.

Supreme Court to Hear National Right to Work Foundation Case Challenging Backroom Union Organizing Deal

News Release

Supreme Court to Hear National Right to Work Foundation Case Challenging Backroom Union Organizing Deal

Right to Work legal challenge could determine if companies are allowed to hand over sensitive employee information to aggressive union organizers

Washington, DC (June 24, 2013) – Today, the United States Supreme Court announced that it is granting a writ of certiorari in Mulhall v. UNITE HERE, a case that could determine if companies are allowed to hand over workers' personal information to union organizers in exchange for union concessions, among other things.

In 2004, UNITE HERE Local 355 and Mardi Gras Gaming entered into an agreement in which union officials promised to spend over one hundred thousand dollars on a gambling ballot initiative and guaranteed not to picket, boycott, or strike against Mardi Gras facilities.

In return, Mardi Gras agreed to give union operatives employees' personal contact information (including home addresses) and grant access to company facilities during a coercive 'card check' organizing campaign, refrain from informing workers about the downsides of unionization, and refrain from requesting a federally-supervised secret ballot election to determine whether employees unionized.

Click here to read the full release.

Supreme Court Asks for Solicitor General’s Brief in Backroom Union Organizing Case

News Release

Supreme Court Asks for Solicitor General's Brief in Backroom Union Organizing Case

Right to Work legal challenge could determine if companies are allowed to hand over sensitive employee information to aggressive union organizers

Washington, DC (January 14, 2012) – Today, the United States Supreme Court requested a brief from the U.S. Solicitor General in Mulhall v. UNITE HERE, a case that could determine if companies are allowed to hand over workers' personal information to union organizers in exchange for union concessions at the employees' expense.

Patrick Semmens, Vice President of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement:

"We're pleased the Supreme Court wants more views on Mulhall v. UNITE HERE, a case that has important implications for worker rights. Big Labor organizers should not be able to offer secret deals for workers they have no relationship with that exchange union concessions for employees' personal information. The Labor Management Relations Act is intended to prevent backroom payoffs to union officials like the ones at issue in Mulhall, which is why the Supreme Court should take the case and make sure that law does not become an empty letter."

Click here to read the full release.

U.S. Supreme Court Fails to Correct Dangerous Union Exemption from State Identity Theft Laws

News Release

U.S. Supreme Court Fails to Correct Dangerous Union Exemption from State Identity Theft Laws

Resort workers get caught in union membership Twilight Zone

Washington, DC (October 1, 2012) – Today, the U. S. Supreme Court denied a petition to hear a case brought by North Carolina-based AT&T (NYSE: T) employees asking the Court to review two state court decisions regarding a state identity theft law and federal preemption.

The workers appealed the case to the Supreme Court with free legal assistance from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.

In the fall of 2007, Communications Workers of America (CWA) Local 3602 union president John Glenn maliciously posted the names and social security numbers of 33 AT&T employees on a publicly accessible bulletin board at the company's facility in Burlington, N.C.

All the employees whose names and personal information were posted in a hallway close to the building entrance, accessible to the public, had exercised their freedom under the state’s Right to Work law to resign from CWA union membership and cease paying union dues.

Click here to read the full release.

Worker Advocate Asks Federal Labor Board to Uphold Precedent Disallowing Forced Unionization of Professors

News Release

Worker Advocate Asks Federal Labor Board to Uphold Precedent Disallowing Forced Unionization of Professors

Foundation files brief supporting university professors' freedom of speech

Washington, DC (July 11, 2012) – The National Right to Work Foundation filed an amicus curiae ('friend of the court") brief with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) asking the Board to uphold the U.S. Supreme Court's long-standing precedent that disallows union officials from corralling most university professors into unwanted union affiliation.

Foundation staff attorneys filed the brief with the NLRB in a case involving Newspaper Guild of Pittsburgh/Communications Workers of America (CWA) Local 38061 union organizers' attempt to unionize professors at Point Park University in Pittsburgh and ultimately force the professors to pay union dues.

Click here to read the full release.

Update: Supreme Court May Take Foundation Case Challenging SEIU Homecare Forced Unionism Scheme in Fall

This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court took action in another case brought by Foundation staff attorneys. Instead of issuing an order granting or denying cert in the case, the High Court invited the U.S. Solicitor General to file a brief in the case Harris v. Quinn. That request shows that the Justices are interested in the case.

The case stems from a legal challenge initiated by eight Illinois homecare providers with the help of National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys against executive orders issued by Illinois Governor Pat Quinn and his disgraced (and now incarcerated) predecessor, Rod Blagojevich.

Quinn and Blagojevich issued executive orders aimed at forcing unwilling homecare providers into a union. Under the Governors' decrees, personal care providers are considered "public employees" for the purposes of union organizing, a move that has since forced thousands of unwilling care providers into the SEIU's forced dues-paying ranks.



The providers, including lead plaintiff Pam Harris (interviewed in the video above), are challenging the executive orders on the grounds that forcing them to affiliate with a union and subsidize union activities violates their rights to free expression and association.

The U.S. Supreme Court will now decide whether or not to hear the case this Fall, after the U.S. Solicitor General files a brief.

For more information on the case, check out the Foundation's Supreme Court petition. You can also read amicus curiae briefs filed in support of the Foundation's petition from the Cato Institute and the Pacific Legal Foundation.


Terms of Web Site Use      Related Links: National Right to Work Committee | National Institute for Labor Relations Research

Copyright © 2010 National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation
 National Right to Work Legal Defense and Education Foundation, Inc.
8001 Braddock Road / Springfield, Virginia 22160
(703) 321-8510 | (800) 336-3600 / (703) 321-9613 fax - general (703) 321-9319 fax - legal department