SCOTUS Decisions

like_that 1st Team All-PWN
29,228 posts 312 reps Joined Apr 2010
Tue, Jun 26, 2018 3:27 PM

The last few days the SCOTUS has delivered some heavy blows to the left.

-Travel Ban

-Abortion/hospital case in Cali

-A few gerrymandering cases

-They kicked back the florist case back to the lower courts

A lot of these came from 5-4 decisions. Shit like this is why I am happy Hillary isn't president.

QuakerOats Senior Member
11,701 posts 55 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Jun 26, 2018 3:30 PM

Amen

iclfan2 Reppin' the 330/216/843
9,465 posts 82 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 10:25 AM

New ruling says that unions can't force non-members to pay fees. So much winning. I'm sure some people will somehow complain about this. 

QuakerOats Senior Member
11,701 posts 55 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 10:31 AM

I can't take it; stop winning so much.

Spock Senior Member
5,271 posts 9 reps Joined Jul 2013
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 10:38 AM
posted by iclfan2

New ruling says that unions can't force non-members to pay fees. So much winning. I'm sure some people will somehow complain about this. 

as a union member who in Ohio really has no rights for employment since the evaluation system for my job has changed and you can be let go for any reason,why pay dues for protective rights under any collective bargaining agreement?  I will just take the $700 a year back in my paycheck.

Spock Senior Member
5,271 posts 9 reps Joined Jul 2013
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 10:41 AM

too add to that.....unions like the NEA, OEA etc..... better lower their dues because they just lost about half their members.

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 93 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 12:34 PM
posted by Spock

too add to that.....unions like the NEA, OEA etc..... better lower their dues because they just lost about half their members.

The unions will be just fine if they cut their massive campaign contributions and just focus on their job, which is collective bargaining.

Spock Senior Member
5,271 posts 9 reps Joined Jul 2013
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 12:37 PM
posted by gut

The unions will be just fine if they cut their massive campaign contributions and just focus on their job, which is collective bargaining.

Hugely agree with this.  Paying for federal and state mediation while negotiating contracts is well worth the money.  The OEA guys are very good at what they do

justincredible Honorable Admin
37,969 posts 201 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 12:44 PM
posted by gut

The unions will be just fine if they cut their massive campaign contributions and just focus on their job, which is collective bargaining.

My wife was in the NEA (forced) and the lead up to elections was extremely annoying. We'd essentially get a new campaign mailer for a democrat candidate every single day.

BoatShoes Senior Member
5,991 posts 23 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 1:13 PM
posted by Spock

as a union member who in Ohio really has no rights for employment since the evaluation system for my job has changed and you can be let go for any reason,why pay dues for protective rights under any collective bargaining agreement?  I will just take the $700 a year back in my paycheck.

In the long run the ruling IMHO could be a win for public sector unions and eventually all unions. Since public sector bargaining is inherently related to free expression per Janus it opens up the opportunity for the unions to argue that being required to bargain for the same benefits for non-union employees violates their 1st Amendment Rights. No bargaining for pensions for non-union employees will make joining the union pretty attractive whereas now you can get all those benefits benefits bargained-for on your behalf without having to pay. 

iclfan2 Reppin' the 330/216/843
9,465 posts 82 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 1:26 PM
posted by BoatShoes

In the long run the ruling IMHO could be a win for public sector unions and eventually all unions. Since public sector bargaining is inherently related to free expression per Janus it opens up the opportunity for the unions to argue that being required to bargain for the same benefits for non-union employees violates their 1st Amendment Rights. No bargaining for pensions for non-union employees will make joining the union pretty attractive whereas now you can get all those benefits benefits bargained-for on your behalf without having to pay. 

With all of the pay gap stuff, you really think a company is going to pay union employees a different rate/ pension plan than non-union for the same skill/ experience? Seems to me like that would open them up to constant litigation. When they hire a new employee are they going to ask if he will be in the union to see what pay/ pension they can offer?

QuakerOats Senior Member
11,701 posts 55 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 1:35 PM

Instead of the typical one-size-fits-all BIG government style of employ, performance-based compensation should be the answer.  If you work hard, do a great job, and have a good attitude, you would/should get paid more.  Most people will fall in line; the rest can go elsewhere.  The efficiencies gained would save taxpayers billions. 

BoatShoes Senior Member
5,991 posts 23 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 1:45 PM
posted by iclfan2

With all of the pay gap stuff, you really think a company is going to pay union employees a different rate/ pension plan than non-union for the same skill/ experience? Seems to me like that would open them up to constant litigation. When they hire a new employee are they going to ask if he will be in the union to see what pay/ pension they can offer?

No reason you couldn't have a job posting saying - A). If bargaining unit - X Pay and Pension - if non-bargaining - Y Pay and no Pension if the courts were to follow the Janus reasoning. They already as part of their labor agreements determine wither certain positions will be bargaining and non-bargaining - the Union could just decide to bargain to make this flexible based on whether or not a person will be in the union. As long as it was clearly not based on a protected class they could argue that they have a first amendment right not to bargain the same for a non-union member and non-union membership isn't a protected class. 

CenterBHSFan 333 - I'm only half evil
7,259 posts 46 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 2:12 PM

Kennedy is retiring from SCOTUS.

8,788 posts 21 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 2:15 PM
posted by CenterBHSFan

Kennedy is retiring from SCOTUS.

No way in hell will the Ds in the Senate allow for a confirmation hearing or vote until after the Midterms. They will scream, the Rs held up the seat until after the election and now we should do the same. 

I don't know if it is right or not, but shit....things are going to get really nasty now...

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 93 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 2:17 PM
posted by ptown_trojans_1

No way in hell will the Ds in the Senate allow for a confirmation hearing or vote until after the Midterms. They will scream, the Rs held up the seat until after the election and now we should do the same. 

I don't know if it is right or not, but shit....things are going to get really nasty now...

How exactly are they going to stop it?  It's also not quite the same argument as it's the POTUS who nominates, and POTUS is not on the ballot this election cycle.

Truthfully, both Roberts and Kennedy have been swing votes.  All this will really do is leave Roberts as the only swing vote, one who leans right on business issues and left on many social issues.

CenterBHSFan 333 - I'm only half evil
7,259 posts 46 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 2:18 PM
posted by ptown_trojans_1

No way in hell will the Ds in the Senate allow for a confirmation hearing or vote until after the Midterms. They will scream, the Rs held up the seat until after the election and now we should do the same. 

I don't know if it is right or not, but shit....things are going to get really nasty now...

Yeahhhhh I definitely agree with you on this. Twitter will win the Academy Awards with all the drama we will see in the next few days!

8,788 posts 21 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 2:22 PM
posted by gut

How exactly are they going to stop it?  It's also not quite the same argument as it's the POTUS who nominates, and POTUS is not on the ballot this election cycle.

Truthfully, both Roberts and Kennedy have been swing votes.  All this will really do is leave Roberts as the only swing vote, one who leans right on business issues and left on many social issues.

Yeah, one could make the case that, like the Rs did, that the voters should determine who gets to pick the next justice and that the elections in November could do that. Say, it's a check on Trump to make sure he does not turn the Court too radical. It's the same argument the Rs made. I'm not sure its right, but I could easily see the argument being made. 

Also, it depends on who Trump picks. If he goes with a moderate, it takes the steam out of the process. If he goes full Trump and goes full blown conservative that wants to overturn Roe v. Wade and the Gay Marriage stuff, look out....

posted by CenterBHSFan

Yeahhhhh I definitely agree with you on this. Twitter will win the Academy Awards with all the drama we will see in the next few days!

Days...try months. 
 

 

iclfan2 Reppin' the 330/216/843
9,465 posts 82 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 2:23 PM
posted by ptown_trojans_1

No way in hell will the Ds in the Senate allow for a confirmation hearing or vote until after the Midterms. They will scream, the Rs held up the seat until after the election and now we should do the same. 

Good. I hope they make complete asses of themselves. Can only hope Ginsberg has leave too. Twitter would be amazing.

I'd also like to say the Supreme court is garbage since they split politically 90% of the time. As seen by all 4 liberal justices dissenting on clear free speech violations.

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 93 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Jun 27, 2018 2:29 PM
posted by iclfan2

Good. I hope they make complete asses of themselves. Can only hope Ginsberg has leave too. Twitter would be amazing.

I'd also like to say the Supreme court is garbage since they split politically 90% of the time. As seen by all 4 liberal justices dissenting on clear free speech violations.

In a perfect world, Kennedy is replaced by a moderate, and Ginsburg is replace by a moderate....hopefully both apolitical.  A 3-3-3 court would be pretty good, ideally 2-5-2 (if politics has any place at all on the SCOTUS).

LOL, this is like Christmas for liberals. I wonder if they'll wheel Ginsburg out on the campaign trail.

Login

Register

Already have an account? Login