Oral Arguments in Locke v. Karass

The First Amendment Center provides an overview of oral arguments in Locke v. Karass, argued Monday before the Supreme Court.  Their prediction: doesn't look like the First Amendment poses a bar to the union fees at issue. 

From the website:

The Supreme Court seemed skeptical yesterday of the argument that the First Amendment rights of non-union members should include refusing to pay fees that support certain kinds of national union litigation.

The justices, on the opening day of the fall term, were hearing arguments in Locke v. Karass, the latest in a series of cases supported by the National Right to Work Foundation. The group opposes union dominance of workplaces by espousing the First Amendment rights of non-union members to refuse to fund union activities with which they might disagree. . . .

During active questioning from the bench yesterday, some justices wondered why that small portion raises First Amendment problems at all. Several analogized the pooling arrangement to “labor litigation insurance” that could be a legitimate expense chargeable to non-union members. . . .