To: cuban leaf
Legal experts agree the unions victory likely will be short-lived. Joel Schumm, a law professor at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis, said the constitutional clause under question historically has applied to individuals.
The Supreme Court, he said, would need to be convinced to extend that right from individuals to unions.
Unions are not generally thought of as a person, nor are they organizations that existed when the Indiana Constitution was ratified in 1851, he said.
Yes, and I am NO fan of unions, but I do not believe a law that requires them to represent people who have not paid for said representation is patently unfair. I don’t know about whether it’s constitutional, however.
posted on 09/10/2013 6:56:59 AM PDT
by cuban leaf
(Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson