Co-published by Newsweek
“Is he threatening the Democrats?” asks former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman about Brett Kavanaugh. “Is he threatening people who oppose his nomination? We don’t need a Supreme Court justice who is going to use his position to get revenge.”
The former U.S. Supreme Court Justice said he had thought Brett Kavanaugh to be “a fine federal judge and should [have] been confirmed, [but] his performance during the hearings changed my mind.”
The hurt many women have felt after the Kavanaugh hearings goes well beyond the confirmation process of a Supreme Court nominee.
In trying to elude his Senate interrogators by offering what appeared to be a filigree of fibs and half-truths, Brett Kavanaugh continually painted himself into corners.
Co-published by Newsweek
Senator Charles Grassley has raced to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, in spite of sexual assault allegations against the Supreme Court nominee. Contrast this with Grassley’s public support for victims of sexual harassment in the judicial branch during a June hearing of his committee.
Legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky says the Supreme Court nominee “is going to move constitutional law very substantially to the right, and this will hurt a lot of people. I think he’s going to be the fifth vote to gut many federal civil rights laws.”
“Kavanaugh,” says UC Berkeley law school dean Erwin Chemerinsky, “doesn’t have to say any more than is needed to make sure he doesn’t lose the Republican vote, and he knows that.”
According to Seattle University law professor Charlotte Garden, today’s Supreme Court decision won’t be the end of the legal assault on the public-sector labor movement.
The stacking of the U.S. Supreme Court with anti-union justices has allowed the right-to-work movement to circumvent, and undercut, pro-union state policies.
Co-published by Fast Company
24 Hour Fitness’ policies have brought the fitness chain in the crosshairs of the National Labor Relations Board, which has said the company’s employee arbitration agreements violate federal labor law.
The Janus v. AFSCME case that landed before the U.S. Supreme Court Monday may not only affect the destiny of public-sector unions, but also how much equal access to the democratic process Americans will have in the future.
Co-published by International Business Times
Justice Stephen Breyer has said a case pending before the Supreme Court could cut out “the entire heart of the New Deal.” It could also enrich the Trump Organization.
For the past year Capital & Main has produced a wide range of coverage of Janus v. AFSCME. Below we offer a comprehensive primer on the case, its origins and its potential implications.
Co-published by AlterNet
A Supreme Court case that could topple the power of California’s unions has been a perfect storm gathering for 40 years.
Co-published by International Business Times
Right-to-work forces see in Janus v. AFSCME a golden opportunity to cripple public-sector unions, while organized labor looks for a silver lining in the event the Supreme Court rules in Mark Janus’ favor.
Playwright John Strand’s presentation of Antonin Scalia as not the “monster” his critics make him out to be may hold some truth, but it’s surely an incomplete one.
Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch emerged Wednesday from his third day of confirmation hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee relatively unbloodied by relentless grilling from Democrats.
Last Wednesday the Drug Policy Alliance, a New York-based drug-reform nonprofit, held a media conference call meant to celebrate a successful election night. Voters in eight states had legalized cannabis for recreational purposes; in several more states ballot measures cleared the way for marijuana’s medical use.
Last month millions of undocumented immigrants were left in legal limbo when a divided U.S. Supreme Court let stand a lower court ruling that had blocked President Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration.
This morning the U.S. Supreme Court announced a 4-4 tie vote on Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a lawsuit in which Rebecca Friedrichs, an Orange County public school teacher, and other plaintiffs sought to deny teachers unions the ability to collect from their members “fair share” fees for collective bargaining. Because of the high court deadlock, […]
Even as Saturday’s death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was setting the stage for what promises to be an incendiary battle of wills between Republican leaders in Congress and President Obama over naming a replacement for a man considered a cornerstone of the court’s conservative majority, California teachers and public-sector unions across the country […]
Last Monday was an important day for America’s shrinking middle class. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a case that could impose radical new limits on the rights of public-sector workers—like teachers, nurses and firefighters—to join together to win better lives for their families and communities. What’s at stake is a basic democratic […]
On Monday the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a lawsuit that targets Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, a nearly 40-year cornerstone of labor-management relations. At stake is the principle that, although public employees who don’t join a union cannot be required to pay for the union’s political activities, […]
Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, the latest struggle over workers’ rights, a case whose oral arguments were heard Monday by the U.S. Supreme Court, clearly means different things to different groups. The passionate rhetoric around Friedrichs, and most of its proponents’ legal arguments, have focused on individual liberties and freedom of speech. “Paying fees […]
Read transcript of today’s Supreme Court oral arguments in Friedrichs v. CTA Last July, 2,000 conservatives and Tea Party activists gathered in Las Vegas for the annual FreedomFest, which featured GOP presidential frontrunners Donald Trump and Marco Rubio. But it was a fourth grade public school teacher from Orange County named Rebecca Friedrichs who promised […]
Next spring, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide a case that could threaten the economy and American democracy. Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association asks the justices to consider overturning a 1977 Supreme Court unanimous ruling (Abood v. Detroit Board of Education) that protected the right of teachers, nurses, librarians, firefighters and other public workers to form unions. The Abood case emphasized […]
The Supreme Court’s ruling Friday to legalize same-sex marriage is a victory for human rights and an occasion to rejoice. The decision follows in the footsteps of the Supreme Court’s 1967 decision in Loving v. Virginia that outlawed states’ bans on interracial marriage, an earlier pathbreaking victory for marriage equality. But there is a huge difference in […]
In two Thursday rulings the Supreme Court came down on the side of a functioning government that can help improve life prospects for Americans – should the people’s representatives so desire. While Californians wouldn’t have been immediately impacted had the Court undermined legislation on health care and housing discrimination, the implications could have been drastic […]
“It’s always darkest before the dawn” sang Pete Seeger. “And that’s what keeps me moving on.” The recent spate of reactionary decisions by the Roberts Supreme Court — including this week’s outrageous Hobby Lobby ruling — triggers thoughts of a better day, when the right-wingers on the court will have retired or died, replaced by […]
In Harris v. Quinn, the Supreme Court held by a 5-4 margin that an “agency shop” requirement—under which unionized public employees must pay their fair share of the costs of negotiating and administering a collective-bargaining agreement whose benefits they enjoy—may not be imposed on homecare workers who are (in the conservative majority’s view) only tenuously […]