Read on Twitter
#SCOTUS speculation for folks interested in the future of organized labor.
The Court has now twice RESCHEDULED it private conference discussion of Janus II, a case threatening bankruptcy for public sector unions.
What might this mean?
The Court has now twice RESCHEDULED it private conference discussion of Janus II, a case threatening bankruptcy for public sector unions.
What might this mean?
Backstory: Janus I held that public sector unions can't charge objecting workers "fair share fees" for the cost of public sector bargaining moving forward. The Q in Janus II is whether unions can be forced to refund hundreds of millions of $$ in fees collected BEFORE Janus I.
An unbroken string of lower courts have answered "No." Janus then petitioned SCOTUS for review (another case, Danielson, presents the same Q).
Both petitions were calendared for discussion on 6/18, when the Court would vote whether to grant cert. A GRANT would = doom for unions.
Both petitions were calendared for discussion on 6/18, when the Court would vote whether to grant cert. A GRANT would = doom for unions.
But before 6/18, the Court rescheduled discussion to today, 6/25.
The same thing happened again; the Ct again rescheduled discussion of the case for the next conference.
What does it mean?
The same thing happened again; the Ct again rescheduled discussion of the case for the next conference.
What does it mean?
One might think it means that some (conservative) justice (likely Alito) is preparing a dissent from denial. But that doesn't add up. Dissents from denial usually follow RELISTED cases, rather than RESCHEDULED ones. A case is relisted AFTER it's been discussed, not before.
Thus, dissents from denial usually follow RELISTS because the author of the dissent doesn't know if cert will be denied until the Conference itself. Once denied, the author then asks for the case to be relisted so (s)he can draft a dissent from denial.
A request to RESCHEDULE happens BEFORE the Court ever votes whether to grant the case. So no one knows for sure if cert will even be denied, making a dissent unlikely. Hence, Janus II probably hasn't been rescheduled for the purpose of a dissent from denial.
Why the 2-time rescheduling, then? My guess is the conservative Justice most passionate about crushing organized labor (Alito) is lobbying his colleagues. Once a case is denied, it's denied. So SAA may be trying to get folks like the Chief on board NOW, before a vote.
You might think, why does it take weeks to lobby the Chief? Well, remember they're not in the same building now. Alito can't swing by the Chief's office. And they have some huge merits cases in the works, taking their attention. So Alito could be rescheduling to buy time. END
