Welcome to Democratic Convention Watch

Donate to DCW


Follow DCW on Twitter
Follow DCW on Facebook
2012 Democratic Convention
2012 Republican Convention Charlotte Host Committee
DNCC
2010 Census

Follow DCW on Google+
DCW iPhone App Info
A Guide to DemConWatch
Tags
FAQ
2008 Democratic Primary Links
2008 Democratic National Convention Links
DemConWatch Archives '05-'08
DemConWatch Speeches
Inauguration Information
DCW Store

HOME
Mobile Version




Search


Advanced Search
Contributors:
MattOreo
DocJess

This site is not affiliated with the DNC, DNCC, or any campaign.

Email us at

Blog Roll
Frontloading HQ
The Field
MyDD
Swing State Project
DemNotes
DemRulz

DCW in the News
St. Louis Channel 2 News
AP
Politico
Wall Street Journal
The New York Times
NPR
Wired
US News & World Report

Supreme Court Opinions -- Union Dues and Indecency but no Health Care or Immigration

by: tmess2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 at 10:43:37 AM EDT


The U.S. Supreme Court handed down four opinions today, leaving six cases for next week.  They have not yet announced if there will be a second date for issuing opinions next week or if all will be handed down on Monday.  Among the outstanding cases are the Health Care and Immigration cases.

Two significant cases First Amendment cases were issued today.

First, and very significant to this blog, is Knox v. SEIU (the union dues case).  The normal rule in closed-shop states is that, when the annual dues notice is sent, the union must notify what portion of the dues is for union expenses and what portion is for lobbying-type expenses.  Union members must then affirmatively opt-out of paying the lobbying portion.  In this case, after the initial assessment, the union decided it needed an emergency assessment to respond to two ballot issues.  By a 6 (5-1)-3 7(5-2)-2 vote, the Supreme Court found that, for such 100% political emergency assessments, that union members had to opt-in rather than opt out.

The second case is FCC v. Fox (the fleeting obscenities case).  This case involved fines issued for "fleeting obscenities" on live broadcasts by Fox and ABC when those obscenieties occurred prior to the FCC issuing a rule clarifying that fines could be imposed for such fleeting obscenities.  In an 8(7-1)-0 ruling, the Supreme Court held that it would violate due process to fine Fox and ABC for conduct occurring before the rule was clarified on the grounds that the prior rule was too vague.  By making this ruling, the Supreme Court eliminated the need to address whether the current rule penalizing fleeting obscenities violates the First Amendment.

tmess2 :: Supreme Court Opinions -- Union Dues and Indecency but no Health Care or Immigration

Follow Democratic Convention Watch on Facebook and Twitter. Iphone/Android apps available.

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email


Menu


Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

Make a New Account


Currently 0 user(s) logged on.



Subscribe to Posts

DemConWatch on Twitter
DemConWatch on Facebook


View blog authority

Add to Technorati Favorites

Wikio - Top Blogs - Politics

Who links to my website?

Sign the Petition (A)
Powered by: SoapBlox