Front Page
NMJ Search
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House

"The electorate can ultimately decide whether [lawmakers'] judgments are sound, wise, and constitute good governance and can express their opinions at the polls and by other means," Federal Judge Philip Simon ruled in tossing a union lawsuit against Indiana's right-to-work law.
Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
Courts Strike Down Challenges to Right to Work
Washington Free Beacon
A pair of federal courts struck down union challenges to labor reforms in Indiana and Wisconsin last week, preserving major Republican gains aimed at cutting costs and attracting business.

Federal Judge Philip Simon on Thursday tossed out a lawsuit aimed at preventing Indiana from becoming the first right-to-work state in the Midwest. He rejected the union's contention that Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels and the legislature overreached in pursuing labor reforms.

"None of the legal challenges launched by the union here to attack Indiana's new Right to Work law can succeed," he wrote. "The electorate can ultimately decide whether [lawmakers'] judgments are sound, wise, and constitute good governance and can express their opinions at the polls and by other means. But those are questions beyond the reach of the federal court"...

Judge Simon's ruling only applies to federal challenges to the law. Unions have also sued in state court to prevent the law from going into effect. They say it violates an Indiana constitutional provision that prevents the government from denying private organizations their rightful wages.

"Indiana's own constitution says that you can't mandate people to act without just compensation," said Marc Poulos, an attorney challenging the Indiana law on behalf of the Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa Foundation for Fair Contracting (IIIFFC). "Right-to-work no longer allow us to collect the reasonable fees for the representation we provide all employees."

However, supporters of the law point out that the provision refers to the government honoring its own contracts for services rather than private transactions, such as union dues. Republican state Rep. Jerry Torr, who authored the right-to-work law, said he believes it will survive all legal challenges...

Soon after the Indiana ruling, a federal appeals court in Chicago upheld Republican Gov. Scott Walker's public sector labor reforms, which helped close Wisconsin's $3.6 billion deficit after its passage in 2010. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the act "in its entirety," overturning a previous federal ruling that stopped Act 10's prohibition of automatic union deductions from employee paychecks and recertification.

The labor groups that brought the suit contended that curtailing the ability of unions to automatically collect dues from employee paychecks violated its freedom of speech. The court, however, determined that the system represented a "subsidy" to unions rather than an extension of natural rights.

"While the First Amendment prohibits 'plac[ing] obstacles in the path' of speech...nothing requires government to 'assist others in funding the expression of particular ideas, including political ones,'" the decision says.

Walker welcomed the ruling, hoping it would allow the state to move past the division and at times violent upheaval caused by union members and allies...

The ruling represented Walker's second major victory in the fight to preserve the reforms, which took away collective bargaining for public sector employee benefits and pensions, while preserving them for salaries. Walker previously survived a recall election sponsored by the unions.

Act 10 has saved Wisconsin more than $2 billion since its June 2011 implementation.

The rulings come as unions ramp up legal challenges to Michigan's new right-to-work law. Taubman says the courts have helped to solidify the foothold labor reformers have made in the heavily unionized Midwest.


Editor's Note: Imagine that, free to work in the land of the free...

The informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a sustaining donation today.

Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations. is not supported by any political organization.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by is copyrighted. supports and its goal: the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

The Media © 1998-2014    Content Copyright © Individual authors
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server