Pro-union demonstrators outside the United States Supreme Court in Washington, Jan. 11, 2016. Last week’s arguments in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association illuminated a gap in the Supreme Court’s treatment of capital and labor: The court has long allowed workers to refuse to finance unions’ political activities, but shareholders have no comparable right to refuse to pay for corporate political speech.
Pro-union demonstrators outside the United States Supreme Court in Washington, Jan. 11, 2016. Last week’s arguments in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association illuminated a gap in the Supreme Court’s treatment of capital and labor: The court has long allowed workers to refuse to finance unions’ political activities, but shareholders have no comparable right to refuse to pay for corporate political speech. ZACH GIBSON New York Times
Pro-union demonstrators outside the United States Supreme Court in Washington, Jan. 11, 2016. Last week’s arguments in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association illuminated a gap in the Supreme Court’s treatment of capital and labor: The court has long allowed workers to refuse to finance unions’ political activities, but shareholders have no comparable right to refuse to pay for corporate political speech. ZACH GIBSON New York Times

Free-speech gap between unions and corporations

January 18, 2016 9:49 AM

More Videos

  • Whatcom Republicans answer questions in town hall at Western Washington University

    State Sen. Doug Ericksen, R-Ferndale, and 42nd Rep. Vincent Buys, R-Lynden, answer questions at a town hall event on Thursday, Oct. 12, at Western Washington University in Bellingham. They address: Education spending / Homelessness and mental health (2:33) / Climate change (4:05) / Conservative viewpoints in higher education (6:22) / Transgender bathroom rights (9:03)