Mountain States Legal Foundation Logo

Archived Cases

Archived: Limited and Ethical Government Legal Cases

Since its creation in 1977, MSLF has been one of the Nation's leading legal centers fighting to ensure that the federal government remains a limited government and a government of laws and not men and women. MSLF recognizes that the Constitution was written, not to protect the various units or levels of government, but to preserve the liberty of the American people. MSLF is committed to ensuring that they continue to have that freedom and opportunity.

Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association

Legal Question:

Whether public employees can be forced to fund speech they oppose?

Petitioners

Rebecca Friedrichs; Scott Wilford; Jelena Figueroa; George W. White, Jr; Kevin Roughton; Peggy Searcy; Jose Manso; Harlan Elrich; Karen Cuen; Irene Zavala; Christian Educators Association International

Respondents

California Teachers Association; National Education Association; Savanna District Teachers Association, CTA/NEA; Saddleback Valley Educators Association; Orange Unified Education Association, Inc.; Kern High School Teachers Association; National Education Association-Jurupa; Santa Ana Educators Association, Inc.; Teachers Association of Norwalk-La Mirada Area; Sanger Unified Teachers Association; Associated Chino Teachers; San Luis Obispo County Education Association; Sue Johnson (as superintendent of Savanna School District); Clint Harwick (as superintendent of the Saddleback Valley Unified School District); Michael L. Christensen (as superintendent of the Orange Unified School District); Donald E. Carter (as superintendent of the Kern High School District); Elliott Duchon (as superintendent of the Jurupa Unified School District); Themla Melendez de Santa Ana (as superintendent of the Santa Ana Unified School District); Ruth Perez (as superintendent of the Norwalk-La Mirada Unified School District); Marcus P. Johnson (as superintendent of the Sanger Unified School District); Wayne Joseph (as superintendent of the Chino Valley Unified School District); and Julian D.      Croker (as superintendent of the San Luis Obispo County Office of Education)

Amicus Curiae:

Mountain States Legal Foundation

Court:

Supreme Court of the United States
Unknown

Under California law, once a union becomes the exclusive bargaining representative in a school district, it represents all public school employees for purposes of bargaining with the district and all employees, as a condition of their employment, must join the union or pay a “fair share service fee,” which is equivalent to the union dues but includes fees not devoted to any negotiations. The union provides notice to employees of the breakdown of the chargeable and nonchargeable portions of the fee and employees may affirmatively and annually opt out of paying the nonchargeable fees. 

On April 30, 2013, public school teachers and Christian Educators Association International sued the most politically powerful union in the State, the California Teachers Association, its national and local affiliates, and representatives challenging the “agency shop” regimes in their districts and the opt-out requirements used by the union.  The teachers quickly moved for judgment on the pleadings and noted the California federal district court was bound by Supreme Court and appeals court precedent. The district court agreed and ruled in favor of the union.  On November 18, 2014, without oral argument, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court.  On January 26, 2015, the teachers filed a petition for writ of certiorari, which was granted on June 30, 2015.

In Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Education, 431 U.S. 209 (1977), teachers challenged agency shop provisions in Michigan law substantially similar to those challenged by the California teachers.  The Court held that annual agency fees did not violate the teachers’ rights but unions could not use fees for activities not “germane” to their duties.

On September 11, 2015, MSLF filed a friend of the court brief in support of the teachers urging the Court to require unions to allow nonmember employees the opportunity to opt in to supporting efforts unrelated to collective bargaining.  On January 11, 2016, the Court heard oral argument.  On March 29, 2016, in a 4-4 decision, the Court affirmed the ruling of the Ninth Circuit.  Plaintiffs filed a petition for rehearing, which has not yet been distributed for conference.

No Status Updates
  • Supreme Court Must Restore Teachers’ Speech Rights

    Sep 11, 2015
    A western, public-interest legal foundation with years of experience before the Supreme Court of the United States defending constitutional rights today urged that the Court overturn a 1977 ruling that violates school teachers’ First Amendment rights.


Help protect constitutional liberties and private property rights, and promote limited and ethical government and the free enterprise system:

Donate Here