WhatFinger

But in yesterday's arguments, Justice Gorsuch said nothing to give any hints as to where he stands

Unions' ability to take workers' money against their will is in big trouble


Unions' ability to take workers' money against their will is in big trouble Current law, established more than 40 years ago, says unions can compel workers to pay them "agency fees" even if the workers choose not to join the unions, because the workers still benefit from unions' work collectively bargaining for wages, pensions, etc. That law almost went down two years ago, but Antonin Scalia's death resulted in a 4-4 tie vote. Now comes the case known as Janus v. AFSCME, which considers the exact same question, and the presumption most people are making is that Justice Neil Gorsuch will provide the fifth vote for workers' rights to keep their money, just as Scalia would have. That may indeed be the case, but during yesterday's oral arguments, Gorsuch played it very close to the vest:
Read Full Article...

Welcome to CFP’s Comment Section!

The Comment section of online publications is the new front in the ongoing Cancel Culture Battle.

Big Tech and Big Media are gunning for the Conservative Voice—through their Comment Sections.

Canada Free Press wishes to stay in the fight, and we want our fans, followers, commenters there with us.

We ask only that commenters keep it civil, keep it clean.

Thank You for your patience and for staying aboard the CFP ‘Mother Ship’.

READ OUR Commenting Policy


CFP Comments

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Comments


Support Canada Free Press

Donate


Recommended by Canada Free Press


Subscribe

Sponsored