Supreme Court heard Harris v. Quinn on January 21, 2014
Listen to the Supreme Court Oral Arguments in Harris v. Quinn:
With the help of National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys, Pam Harris and seven other Illinois care providers are challenging a forced-unionism scheme enacted by Illinois Governors Rod Blagojevich and Pat Quinn on the grounds that it violates their rights to free expression and association by forcing them to subsidize union lobbying.
The case is a class-action lawsuit filed by the providers after Quinn signed an executive order designating 4,500 individuals who offer in-home care to disabled persons as “public employees,” thus rendering them vulnerable to unwanted union organizing. However, the scheme only designates providers as public employees for the purposes of unionization, leaving the homecare recipients as the employers for all other aspects of the providers’ work.
As a result of Quinn’s order, Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) bosses have been competing to acquire monopoly bargaining control over this newly-created class of public employees.
Quinn’s executive order mirrored one issued by disgraced former Governor Blagojevich, which designated over 20,000 personal care providers as state workers solely for the purpose of forcing them into union ranks. (Blagojevich’s order eventually became a law.) Quinn then expanded Blagojevich’s directive to cover an additional 4,500 providers who were not included in the original order.
In a 2010 mail-in vote, those homecare providers emphatically rejected unionization by a two-to-one margin. But because of Quinn’s executive order, they’ll continue to face unionization drives until they capitulate. The personal care providers covered by Blagojevich’s executive order have already been forced to pay union fees to the SEIU. (Click to go to the NRTW Legal Defense Foundation page for more…)
From the ScotusBlog.org
Harris v. Quinn
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11-681 | 7th Cir. | Jan. 21, 2014 | TBD | TBD | TBD | OT 2013 |
Issue: (1) Whether a state may, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, compel personal care providers to accept and financially support a private organization as their exclusive representative to petition the state for greater reimbursements from its Medicaid programs; and (2) whether the lower court erred in holding that the claims of providers in the Home Based Support Services Program are not ripe for judicial review.
| Date | Proceedings and Orders |
|---|---|
| Nov 29 2011 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 4, 2012) |
| Dec 22 2011 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including February 3, 2012, for all respondents. |
| Dec 30 2011 | Waiver of right of respondent Pat Quinn, Governor of Illinois to respond filed. |
| Jan 4 2012 | Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, et al.. |
| Jan 4 2012 | Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute, et al. filed. |
| Feb 3 2012 | Brief of respondent SEIU Healthcare Illinois and Indiana, et al. in opposition filed. |
| Feb 15 2012 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 2, 2012. |
| Feb 16 2012 | Reply of petitioners Pamela Harris, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| Feb 29 2012 | Response Requested . (Due March 30, 2012) |
| Mar 19 2012 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 30, 2012. |
| Apr 30 2012 | Brief of respondent Pat Quinn, Governor of Illinois in opposition filed. |
| May 10 2012 | Reply of petitioners Pamela Harris, et al. filed. |
| May 15 2012 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 31, 2012. |
| Jun 25 2012 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 28, 2012. |
| Jun 29 2012 | The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States. |
| May 10 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. |
| May 21 2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 6, 2013. |
| May 22 2013 | Supplemental brief of petitioners in response to brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. (Distributed). |
| Jun 10 2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 13, 2013. |
| Jun 17 2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 20, 2013. |
| Jun 25 2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 26, 2013. |
| Sep 23 2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 30, 2013. |
| Oct 1 2013 | Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, et al. GRANTED. |
| Oct 1 2013 | Petition GRANTED. |
| Oct 22 2013 | The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners’ brief on the merits is extended to and including November 22, 2013. |
| Oct 30 2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent Quinn. |
| Oct 31 2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioners. |
| Nov 1 2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondents S.E.I.U. Healthcare Illinois & Indiana, et al. |
| Nov 4 2013 | SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, January 21, 2014. |
| Nov 13 2013 | Record received from U.S.C.A. for 7th Circuit is electronic. |
| Nov 22 2013 | Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.) |
| Nov 22 2013 | Brief of petitioners Pamela Harris, et al. filed. |
| Nov 27 2013 | Brief amici curiae of California Public School Teachers, et al. filed. |
| Nov 27 2013 | Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute, et al. filed. |
| Nov 27 2013 | Brief amici curiae of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, et al. filed. |
| Nov 27 2013 | Brief amici curiae of Family Child Care Inc., et al. filed. |
| Nov 27 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Illinois Policy Institute filed. (Distributed) |
| Nov 27 2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus cuirae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondent AFSME Council 31. |
| Nov 29 2013 | Brief amici curiae of Albert Contreras, et al. filed. |
| Nov 29 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Mackinac Center for Public Policy filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 2 2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondent Local 73, S.E.I.U. |
| Dec 4 2013 | CIRCULATED. |
| Dec 23 2013 | Brief of respondent SEIU Healthcare Illinois & Indiana filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 23 2013 | Brief of respondents AFSCME Council 31, and SEIU Local 73 filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 23 2013 | Brief of respondent Pat Quinn, Governor of Illinois filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 27 2013 | Brief amici curiae of American Association of People With Disabilities, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 30 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 30 2013 | Brief amici curiae of 21 Past Presidents of the D.C. Bar filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 30 2013 | Brief amici curiae of State of New York, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 30 2013 | Brief amici curiae of Public Safety Employees filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 30 2013 | Brief amici curiae of Labor Law Professors filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 30 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of The Paraprofessional Healthcare Institute (PHI) filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 30 2013 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. |
| Dec 30 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 30 2013 | Brief amici curiae of National Education Association, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
December 10th, SCOTUS Dismisses UNITE-HERE Case, Leaves NRTW 11th Circuit Victory
[vsw id=”UczzRTQoWDE” source=”youtube” width=”500″ height=”300″ autoplay=”no”]
November 13th U.S. Supreme Heard Oral Arguments for UNITE-HERE v. Mulhall
Listen to the Oral Arguments in the UNITE-HERE v Mulhall case:
Download the UNITE-HERE v Mulhall oral arguments transcript.
In 2004, UNITE HERE Local 355 and Mardi Gras Gaming entered into an agreement in Mardi Gras agreed to give union operatives workers’ personal contact information (including home addresses), grant them access to company facilities during a coercive ‘card check’ organizing campaign, refrain from informing workers about the impact of unionization, and refrain from requesting a federally-supervised secret ballot election to determine whether employees unionized. In return, UNITE officials promised to devote over one hundred thousand dollars to help pass a gambling ballot initiative and guaranteed not to picket, boycott, or strike against Mardi Gras facilities..
In return, Mardi Gras agreed to give union operatives workers’ personal contact information (including home addresses), grant them access to company facilities during a coercive ‘card check’ organizing campaign, refrain from informing workers about the impact of unionization, and refrain from requesting a federally-supervised secret ballot election to determine whether employees unionized. With the help of Foundation staff attorneys, Mardi Gras employee Martin Mulhall filed a lawsuit in 2008 challenging the organizing pact.
Under the Labor Management Relations Act, employers are prohibited from handing over “any money or other thing of value” to union organizers, a provision that is supposed to prevent union officials from selling out workers’ rights in exchange for corporate support of unionization. Mulhall argues that the company’s assistance with organizing was of substantial monetary value because it made UNITE HERE’s organizing drive easier and less expensive. (Click to go to the NRTW Legal Defense Foundation page for more…)
Unite Here Local 355 v. Mulhall
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12-99 | 11th Cir. | Nov 13, 2013 | TBD | TBD | TBD | OT 2013 |
Issue: Whether an employer and union may violate Section 302 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 186, by entering into an agreement under which the employer exercises its freedom of speech by promising to remain neutral to union organizing, its property rights by granting union representatives limited access to the employer’s property and employees, and its freedom of contract by obtaining the union’s promise to forego its rights to picket, boycott, or otherwise put pressure on the employer’s business.
| Date | Proceedings and Orders |
|---|---|
| Jul 20 2012 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 23, 2012) |
| Aug 22 2012 | Brief of respondent Martin Mulhall in support filed. |
| Sep 5 2012 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 24, 2012. |
| Oct 10 2012 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 26, 2012. |
| Oct 31 2012 | Response Requested . (Due November 30, 2012) |
| Nov 20 2012 | Brief of respondent Hollywood Greyhound Track, Inc.d/b/a/ Mardi Gras Gaming in opposition filed. VIDED. |
| Nov 21 2012 | Response to conditional cross – petition from respondent Unite Here Local 355 filed. VIDED. |
| Nov 30 2012 | Reply of cross-petitioner Martin Mulhall filed. VIDED. |
| Dec 4 2012 | Reply of petitioner Unite Here Local 355 filed. VIDED. |
| Dec 5 2012 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 4, 2013. |
| Jan 7 2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 11, 2013. |
| Jan 14 2013 | The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States. |
| May 24 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. VIDED. |
| Jun 3 2013 | Supplemental brief of Martin Mulhall in response to brief amicius curiae of the United States filed. (Distributed) VIDED. |
| Jun 3 2013 | Reply of petitioner Unite Here Local 355 to brief for United States as amicus curiae filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| Jun 4 2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 20, 2013. |
| Jun 24 2013 | Petition GRANTED. |
| Jul 12 2013 | The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners’ brief on the merits in the above-entitled case is extended to and including August 15, 2013. |
| Jul 12 2013 | The time to file respondents’ briefs on the merits is extended to and including September 20, 2013. |
| Jul 24 2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondent Hollywood Greyhound Track, Inc. |
| Jul 24 2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondent Martin Mulhall. |
| Aug 13 2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioner. |
| Aug 15 2013 | Joint appendix filed. |
| Aug 15 2013 | Brief of petitioner Unite Here Local 355 filed. |
| Aug 20 2013 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, November 13, 2013. |
| Aug 20 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of National Academy of Arbitrators filed. |
| Aug 22 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. |
| Aug 22 2013 | Brief amici curiae of American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| Aug 26 2013 | CIRCULATED. |
| Sep 16 2013 | Record received from U.S.C.A. for 11th Circuit. (1 envelope) |
| Sep 17 2013 | Record received from U.S.D.C. for Southern District of Florida. (1 box) |
| Sep 20 2013 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. |
| Sep 20 2013 | Brief of respondent Martin Mulhall filed. (Distributed) |
| Sep 20 2013 | Brief of respondent Hollywood Greyhound Track, Inc. filed. (Distributed) |
| Sep 27 2013 | Brief amici curiae of National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| Sep 27 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Council on Labor Law Equality filed. (Distributed) |
| Sep 27 2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence filed. (Distributed) |
| Oct 18 2013 | Reply of petitioner Unite Here Local 355 filed. (Distributed) |
| Oct 21 2013 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. |
| Nov 13 2013 | Argued. For petitioner: Richard G. McCracken, San Francisco, Cal.; and Michael R. Dreeben, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) for respondents: William L. Messenger, Springfield, Va. |
| Dec 10 2013 | Writ of certiorari DISMISSED as improvidently granted. Breyer, J., with whom Sotomayor and Kagan, JJ., join, dissenting. Opinion per curiam. |