Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court upholds Walker's union limits law in Wis.
(AP) ^ | January 18, 2013

Posted on 01/18/2013 12:14:25 PM PST by READINABLUESTATE

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 last
To: READINABLUESTATE

For how long will this stay? The U.S. has become a majority of leftists with an ongoing increase in the number of leftist activist judges. BO is POTUS for another term, and any future vacancies in TSCOTUS will be replaced by leftists.


61 posted on 01/21/2013 1:23:01 PM PST by johnthebaptistmoore (The world continues to be stuck in a "all leftist, all of the time" funk. BUNK THE FUNK!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin

1/22/2013 5:22:00 AM

Federal appeals court upholds Act 10 in its entirety
Court rejects unions’ arguments that collective bargaining reform is unconstitutional

Richard Moore
Investigative Reporter

Gov. Scott Walker and Republican lawmakers scored a major victory Friday, as a federal appeals court rejected union challenges to the constitutionality of Act 10, the state’s controversial collective bargaining reform law.

The statute, which curbed collective bargaining for most public employees, is not out of the woods yet. A separate case in which a state court ruled portions of the law unconstitutional is still pending.

Still, the sweeping nature of the decision in a federal appeals court was a huge win for Walker and his allies.

Concurring with a federal district court judge, the three-judge appeals panel said limitations on collective bargaining were constitutionally valid.

But the judges, in a partially split decision, overturned district court judge William Conley’s determination that the state’s different treatment of certain groups of employees on matters of union dues’ payroll deductions and union recertification violated both the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause and the First Amendment.

The appeals panel said the different treatment violated neither.

http://lakelandtimes.com/main.asp?SectionID=9&SubSectionID=109&ArticleID=16646


62 posted on 01/25/2013 8:38:56 AM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson