Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.

Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education Association

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education Association
Case number: 20-1383
Status: Closed
Important dates
Filed: June 15, 2018
District court decision:
July 8, 2019
Appeals court decision:
Aug. 28, 2020
Supreme Court decision:
June 14, 2021
District court outcome
Public-sector unions cannot be required to refund agency fees paid prior to Janus v. AFSCME.
Appeals court outcome
Affirmed lower court's decision.
Supreme Court outcome
Certiorari denied.

This case is one of over a hundred public-sector union lawsuits Ballotpedia tracked following the U.S. Supreme Court's 2018 decision in Janus v. AFSCME. These pages were updated through February 2023 and may not reflect subsequent case developments. For more information about Ballotpedia's coverage of public-sector union policy in the United States, click here. Contact our team to suggest an update.

Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education Association was decided by a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on August 28, 2020. In a 2-1 vote, the panel affirmed the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania's July 2019 dismissal of the case. The U.S. Supreme Court denied review of the case on June 14, 2021.[1][2][3][4][5]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The parties to the suit: The lead plaintiff was Arthur Diamond. The lead defendant was the Pennsylvania State Education Association.
  • The issue: Can public-sector unions be held liable for refunding agency fees paid prior to the Supreme Court's ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, which held that such fees are unconstitutional?
  • The presiding judge(s): Judge Kim Gibson presided over the district court proceedings. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit comprised Judges Peter Phipps, Marjorie Rendell, and D. Michael Fisher.
  • The outcome: Gibson dismissed the lawsuit, a decision affirmed by the Third Circuit in a 2-1 vote. The Supreme Court denied review.

    • Procedural history

    The lead plaintiff was Arthur Diamond, represented by attorneys Jonathan F. Mitchell and Sean T. Logue, as well as attorneys from Talcott Franklin. The lead defendant was the Pennsylvania State Education Association, represented by counsel from Bredhoff & Kaiser, Eberle & Bundick, Pennsylvania State Education Association, and National Education Association. For a complete list of plaintiffs and defendants in this lawsuit, click here. Below is a brief procedural history of the lawsuit:[1][2][3][4][6][5]

    • June 15, 2018: The plaintiffs in Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education Association first filed their lawsuit on June 15, 2018, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs filed an initial complaint that included challenges to the constitutionality of union membership requirements and fee collection, as well as requests for a refund of all agency fees, costs, and attorney’s fees. The defendants filed to dismiss and the plaintiffs subsequently responded.
    • September 5, 2018: The plaintiffs filed their first amended complaint. Defendants subsequently filed to dismiss.
    • February 5, 2019: The plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, which defendants opposed.
    • July 8, 2019: The court issued an order dismissing the plaintiffs’ claim.
    • August 13, 2019: An appeal was docketed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
    • April 24, 2020: Arguments took place before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
    • August 28, 2020: The Third Circuit affirmed the lower court's dismissal.
    • September 11, 2020: The plaintiffs filed a joint petition for rehearing en banc.
    • October 30, 2020: Rehearing was denied.
    • March 29, 2021: The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
    • May 10, 2021: The defendants filed briefs in opposition to the petition for certiorari.
    • May 24, 2021: The plaintiffs filed a reply to the briefs in opposition.
    • June 14, 2021: The Supreme Court denied review of the case.

    For a list of available case documents, click here.

    Decision

    District court decision

    On July 8, 2019, Judge Kim Gibson granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Gibson wrote the following in the court's opinion:[4]

    “

    After rejecting Plaintiffs' various arguments against Union Defendants' good-faith defense, the Court finds that the good-faith defense applies to Plaintiffs' claims for repayment of previously paid fair-share fees as a matter of law. In Jordan, the Third Circuit explained that "' good faith' gives state actors a defense that depends on their subjective state of mind, rather than the more demanding standard of reasonable belief that governs qualified immunity." Jordan, 20 F.3d at 1277. Here, it was objectively reasonable for Union Defendants to rely on a state statute that was constitutional under controlling Supreme Court precedent when collecting fair-share fees from Plaintiffs. By establishing objective reasonableness as a matter of law, Union Defendants have met the less demanding subjective standard articulated by the Third Circuit in Jordan. Union Defendants are therefore entitled to the dismissal of Plaintiffs'§ 1983 claim to the extent Plaintiffs seek repayment of pre-Janus fair-share fees. [7]

    		”
    —Judge Gibson

    Gibson was appointed by President George W. Bush (R).

    Appellate court decision

    On August 28, 2020, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit voted 2-1 to affirm the lower court's dismissal. Judge Marjorie Rendell, a Bill Clinton (D) appointee, wrote the following in the court's opinion:[8]

    “ We are not the first court of appeals to rule on this question, and we join a growing consensus of our sister circuits who, in virtually identical cases, have held that because the unions collected the fair-share fees in good faith reliance on a governing state statute and Supreme Court precedent, they are entitled to a good faith defense[.][7] ”

    Judge D. Michael Fisher, a George W. Bush (R) appointee, concurred in Rendell's opinion. Judge Peter Phipps, a Donald Trump (R) appointee, dissented.

    Legal context

    Janus v. AFSCME (2018)

    See also: Janus v. AFSCME

    On June 27, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a 5-4 decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (Janus v. AFSCME), ruling that public-sector unions cannot compel non-member employees to pay fees to cover the costs of non-political union activities.[9]

    This decision overturned precedent established in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education in 1977. In Abood, the high court held that it was not a violation of employees' free-speech and associational rights to require them to pay fees to support union activities from which they benefited (e.g., collective bargaining, contract administration, etc.). These fees were commonly referred to as agency fees or fair-share fees.[9]

    Justice Samuel Alito authored the opinion for the court majority in Janus, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch. Alito wrote, "Abood was poorly reasoned. It has led to practical problems and abuse. It is inconsistent with other First Amendment cases and has been undermined by more recent decisions. Developments since Abood was handed down have shed new light on the issue of agency fees, and no reliance interests on the part of public-sector unions are sufficient to justify the perpetuation of the free speech violations that Abood has countenanced for the past 41 years. Abood is therefore overruled."[9]

    Related litigation

    To view a complete list of the public-sector labor lawsuits Ballotpedia tracked between 2019 and 2023, click here.

    Number of federal lawsuits by circuit

    Between 2019 and 2023, Ballotpedia tracked 191 federal lawsuits related to public-sector labor laws. The chart below depicts the number of suits per federal judicial circuit (i.e., the jurisdictions in which the suits originated).

    Public-sector labor lawsuits on Ballotpedia

    See also: Public-sector union policy in the United States, 2018-2023

    Click show to view a list of cases with links to our in-depth coverage.

    v • e
    Public-sector labor lawsuits
    Federal lawsuits

    Adams v. Teamsters Union Local 429 • Akers v. Maryland State Education Association • Aliser v. SEIU California • Allen v. Ohio Civil Service Employees Association • Allen v. Santa Clara County Correctional • Anderson v. SEIU Local 503 • Babb v. California Teachers Association • Baisley v. International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers • Belgau v. Inslee • Bennett v. AFSCME • Bermudez v. SEIU Local 521 • Bierman v. Dayton • Boudreaux v. Louisiana State Bar • Boyle v. SEIU California • Brice v. California Faculty Association • California v. Azar • Campos v. Fresno Deputy Sheriff’s Association • Carey v. Inslee • Casanova v. IAM Local 701 • Chandavong et al. v. Fresno Deputy Sheriff's Association et al. • Cook v. Brown • Cooley v. California Statewide Law Enforcement Association • Crowe v. Oregon State Bar • Cruz v. Union Independiente Autentica de Empleados de la Autoridad de Acueductos y Alcantarillados • Danielson v. Inslee • Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education Association • Doughty v. State Employees Association of New Hampshire, SEIU, Local 1984 • Durst v. OEA • Few v. United Teachers Los Angeles • File v. Hickey • Fischer v. Murphy • Fisk v. Inslee • Fizer v. Ohio Association of Public School Employees • Fleck v. Wetch • Grega v. Council of New Jersey State College Locals • Grossman v. Hawaii Government Employees Association • Gruber v. Oregon State Bar • Guppy v. City of Los Angeles • Halloran v. AFSCME Council 5 • Hamidi v. SEIU • Hannay v. Kent State • Hartnett v. Penn. State Education Association • Hendrickson v. AFSCME Council 18 • Hernandez v. AFSCME California • Hoekman v. Education Minnesota • Hough v. SEIU Local 521 • Imhoff v. California Teachers Association • Jackson v. Napolitano • James v. SEIU Local 688 • Janus v. AFSCME • Jarchow v. Wisconsin • Kabler v. United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 1776 Keystone State • Wenzig v. SEIU Local 668 • Kopie v. International Federation of Professional and Technical Employees • Kurk v. Los Rios Classified Employees Association • Lamberty et al. v. Connecticut State Police Union et al. • LaSpina v. SEIU Pennsylvania State Council • Lee v. Ohio Education Association • Leitch v. AFSCME • Littler v. Ohio Association of Public School Employees • Loescher v. Teamsters Local 320 • Lutter v. JNESO • Mandel v. SEIU Local 73 • Marsh v. AFSCME Local 3299 • Martin v. California Teachers Association • Masuo v. AFSCME AFL-CIO • Matthews v. United Teachers of Los Angeles • Mattos v. AFSCME Council 3 • Mayer v. Wallingford-Swathmore School District • McCain v. Ventura County Federation of College Teachers, AFT Local 1828 • McCollum v. NEA-Alaska • McCutcheon v. CWA Local 7076 • McDonald v. Firth • Mendez v. CTA • Miller v. Inslee • Misja v. PSEA • Molina v. SEIU Local 668 • Mooney v. Illinois Education Association • Nearman v. SEIU Local 503 • Neely v. AFSCME Council 13 • Nguyen v. Admin. and Residual Employees Union • Nichols v. Home Care Providers Union • O'Callaghan v. Drake • Ochoa v. Public Consulting Group • Ocol v. Chicago Teachers Union • Ogle v. Ohio Civil Service Employees Association, AFSCME, Local 11 • Oliver v. SEIU Local 668 • Pellegrino v. New York State United Teachers • Penning v. SEIU Local 1021 • Polk v. Yee • Popp v. ALPAI • Piekarski v. AFSCME Council 5 • Quirarte v. UDW AFSCME Local 3930 • Reisman v. Associated Faculties of the University of Maine • Rizzo-Rupon v. International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, District Lodge 141 • Routh v. Inslee • Schaszberger v. AFSCME Council 13 • Schell v. Oklahoma Supreme Court Justices • Schumaker v. Inslee • Seager v. UTLA • Seidemann v. Professional Staff Congress • Smith v. AFSCME Council No. 8 • Smith v. New Jersey Education Association • Smith v. Bieker • Solomon v. AFSCME District Council 37 • Stroeder v. Service Employees International Union, Local 503 • Sweeney v. Raoul • Sweet v. California Association of Psychiatric Technicians • Taylor v. Heath • Thompson v. AFSCME Council 89, Local 4013 • Thompson v. Marietta Education Association • Thulen v. AFSCME • Uradnik v. Inter Faculty Org. • Utke v. University of Connecticut American Association of University Professors • Weyandt v. PSCOA • Wholean v. CSEA SEIU Local 2001 • Wilford v. National Education Association • Williams v. PSEA • Wolf v. University Professional & Technical Employees • Yates v. Hillsboro Unified School District • Yohn v. California Teachers Association

    See also

    External links

    Case documents

    Supreme Court

    Appeals court

    Trial court

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 PacerMonitor, “DIAMOND et al v. PENNSYLVANIA STATE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION et al,” accessed May 14, 2020
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 PacerMonitor, “Arthur Diamond, et al v. Pennsylvania State Education A, et al,” accessed May 14, 2020
    3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 ClassAction, “Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education Association: Complaint - Class Action,” June 15, 2018
    4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 PacerMonitor, “Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education Association: Memorandum Opinion,” July 8, 2019
    5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Supreme Court of the United States, "Order List: 593 U.S.," June 14, 2021
    6. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "No. 20-1383," accessed June 1, 2021
    7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    8. ↑ United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, "Diamond v. Pennsylvania State Education Association: Order," August 28, 2020
    9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 Supreme Court of the United States, Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al., June 27, 2018
    v • e
    Public-sector union policy in the United States
    Public-sector union policy in the United StatesBPstarlogo.png
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Diamond_v._Pennsylvania_State_Education_Association&oldid=9203505"