Union Station: 9th Circuit cites Belgau v. Inslee in affirming 8 district court decisions

Ninth Circuit cites Belgau v. Inslee in affirming eight district court decisions

On July 29, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit—Senior Judge Mary Schroeder, Senior Judge Barry Silverman, and Judge Mary Murguia—upheld eight district court decisions favorable to public-sector unions, citing the Ninth Circuit’s 2020 ruling in Belgau v. Inslee in each case.

About Belgau v. Inslee

On Sept. 16, 2020, Ninth Circuit Judges M. Margaret McKeown and Morgan Christen, and U.S. District Judge M. Douglas Harpool, affirmed a district court ruling that collective bargaining agreements that restrict the terms under which union members can resign their membership and cease paying dues do not violate the First Amendment. McKeown wrote, “The First Amendment does not support Employees’ right to renege on their promise to join and support the union. This promise was made in the context of a contractual relationship between the union and its employees. When ‘legal obligations . . . are self-imposed,’ state law, not the First Amendment, normally governs.” Bill Clinton (D) nominated McKeown to the court, and Barack Obama (D) nominated Christen and Harpool.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the ruling on June 21, 2021.

How the July 29 decisions cited Belgau

McCollum v. NEA-Alaska

Appeal from: U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska
Original complaint: Aug. 2, 2018
Plaintiffs’ representation: Mitchell Law PLLC
District judge: John W. Sedwick
District court ruling: March 14, 2019
How the Ninth Circuit cited Belgau: “Dismissal of [plaintiff Donn Liston]’s First Amendment claim against the union defendants was proper because the deduction of union membership dues arose from the private membership agreements between the union defendants and plaintiffs, and ‘private dues agreements do not trigger state action and independent constitutional scrutiny.’”

Hernandez v. AFSCME California

Appeal from: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
Original complaint: Aug. 31, 2018
Plaintiffs’ representation: Mitchell Law PLLC
District judge: William B. Shubb
District court ruling: Dec. 19, 2019
How the Ninth Circuit cited Belgau: “Summary judgment was proper on plaintiffs’ First Amendment claims arising from union membership dues deductions. See Belgau v. Inslee … (concluding that the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Council 31 … did not extend a First Amendment right to avoid paying union dues that were agreed upon under validly entered membership agreements).”

Mark Smith v. Kate Bieker

Appeal from: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Original complaint: Sept. 6, 2018
Plaintiffs’ representation: National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation
District judge: Vince Chhabria
District court ruling: June 13, 2019
How the Ninth Circuit cited Belgau: “Summary judgment on [plaintiff Mark Smith]’s First Amendment claim against AFSCME Local 2700 was proper because the deduction of union membership dues arose from the private membership agreement between AFSCME Local 2700 and Smith, and ‘private dues agreements do not trigger state action and independent constitutional scrutiny.’”

Mendez v. CTA

Appeal from: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Original complaint: March 11, 2019
Plaintiffs’ representation: Freedom Foundation; Dhillon Law Group
District judge: Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers
District court ruling: Jan. 16, 2020
How the Ninth Circuit cited Belgau: “The district court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ First Amendment claims against [the defendants] because the deduction of union membership dues arose from the private membership agreements between the union defendants and plaintiffs, and ‘private dues agreements do not trigger state action and independent constitutional scrutiny.’”

Seager v. UTLA

Appeal from: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Original complaint: Jan. 22, 2019
Plaintiffs’ representation: National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation; Smith and Myers LLP
District judge: Josephine L. Staton
District court ruling: Aug. 21, 2019
How the Ninth Circuit cited Belgau: “Dismissal of [plaintiff Irene Seager]’s First Amendment claim against United Teachers of Los Angeles (“UTLA”) was proper because the deduction of union membership dues arose from private membership agreements between UTLA and Seager, and ‘private dues agreements do not trigger state action and independent constitutional scrutiny.’”

Grossman v. Hawaii Government Employees Association

Appeal from: U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii
Original complaint: Dec. 20, 2018
Plaintiffs’ representation: Liberty Justice Center
District judge: Derrick Kahala Watson
District court ruling: Jan. 31, 2020
How the Ninth Circuit cited Belgau: “The parties agree that this court’s intervening decision in Belgau v. Inslee … controls the outcome of [plaintiff Patricia Grossman]’s First Amendment claim arising from the collection of union dues under her membership agreement. We affirm the district court’s summary judgment because Grossman affirmatively and voluntarily consented to the deduction of union dues.”

Anderson v. SEIU Local 503

Appeal from: U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon
Original complaint: Nov. 20, 2018
Plaintiffs’ representation: Freedom Foundation; National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation; Gibson Law Firm
District judge: Marco A. Hernandez
District court ruling: Sept. 4, 2019
How the Ninth Circuit cited Belgau: “The parties agree that this court’s intervening decision in Belgau v. Inslee … controls the outcome of this appeal. We affirm the district court’s judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ action for failure to state a claim. See Belgau … (concluding that the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Council 31 … did not extend a First Amendment right to avoid paying union dues that were agreed upon under validly entered union membership agreements).”

Durst v. Oregon Education Association

Appeal from: U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon
Original complaint: June 11, 2019
Plaintiffs’ representation: Freedom Foundation
District judge: Michael J. McShane
District court ruling: March 31, 2020
How the Ninth Circuit cited Belgau: “Summary judgment was proper on plaintiffs’ First Amendment claims against [the defendants] because the deduction of union membership dues arose from private membership agreements between the parties, and ‘private dues agreements do not trigger state action and independent constitutional scrutiny.’”

Jimmy Carter (D) nominated Schroeder to the court, Clinton nominated Silverman, and Obama nominated Murguia.

About the Ninth Circuit

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit hears appeals from the district courts within its jurisdiction, which includes Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. The chief judge of the court is Sidney Thomas, a Clinton appointee. Of the court’s 29 active judges, Clinton nominated nine, George W. Bush (R) nominated three, Obama nominated seven, and Donald Trump (R) nominated 10.

We are currently tracking 144 lawsuits related to public-sector union policy, 58 of which originated in the Ninth Circuit.

What we’re reading

The big picture

Number of relevant bills by state

We are currently tracking 98 pieces of legislation dealing with public-sector employee union policy. On the map below, a darker shade of green indicates a greater number of relevant bills. Click here for a complete list of all the bills we’re tracking.

Number of relevant bills by current legislative status

Number of relevant bills by partisan status of sponsor(s)

Recent legislative actions

No public-sector union bills saw activity this week.