It’s the 12 Days of Ballotpedia! Your gift powers the trusted, unbiased information voters need heading into 2026. Donate now!

McCutcheon v. CWA Local 7076

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
McCutcheon v. CWA Local 7076
Case number: 1:18-cv-01202
Status: Terminated
Important dates
Filed: December 20, 2018
District court decision: October 21, 2019
Appeals court decision:
District court outcome
The matter was settled out of court, and the plaintiff dismissed the suit voluntarily.

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.

McCutcheon v. CWA Local 7076 was dismissed on October 21, 2019, from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. The suit challenged a union policy that restricted employees from revoking their union dues authorizations or ending union membership outside of two-week opt-out periods.[1]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The parties to the suit: The plaintiff was David McCutcheon. The defendants were the Communications Workers of America (CWA), CWA Local 7076, and Pamela D. Coleman.
  • The issue: Can unions prevent employees from revoking their union dues authorizations outside of an opt-out window?
  • The presiding judge(s): Judge Martha Vazquez was assigned to the case. Vazquez was appointed to the court in 1993 by President Bill Clinton (D).
  • The outcome: The matter was settled out of court, and the plaintiff dismissed the suit voluntarily.
  • Procedural history

    The plaintiff was David McCutcheon. He was represented by the National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation and Barnett Law Firm, PA. The defendants were the Communications Workers of America, CWA Local 7076, and Pamela D. Coleman. CWA Local 7076 and the Communications Workers of America were represented by Altshuler Berzon LLP, Youtz & Valdez, PC, and Richards, Brandt, Miller & Nelson. Pamela D. Coleman was represented by Conklin, Woodcock & Ziegler, PC, and Park & Associates, LLC.

    The plaintiff in McCutcheon v. CWA Local 7076 first filed his lawsuit on December 20, 2018, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. McCutcheon argued that the union prevented him from revoking his union dues authorization outside of a two-week opt-out window in violation of his First Amendment rights under Janus v. AFSCME.[1]

    • December 20, 2018: McCutcheon filed a complaint against all defendants.
    • March 18, 2019: McCutcheon filed an amended complaint.
    • May 16, 2019: McCutcheon filed a second amended complaint.
    • September 9, 2019: McCutcheon asked the court to dismiss the case voluntarily after the union agreed to end the opt-out window restrictions and refund dues collected from the employees who attempted to resign.[1]
    • October 21, 2019: The court dismissed the case.

    For a list of available case documents, click here.


    Decision

    On October 21, 2019, Judge Martha Vazquez dismissed the suit after the matter was settled out of court. Martha Vazquez was appointed to the court in 1993 by President Bill Clinton (D).


    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.[2]

    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.[2]

    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."[2]

    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.

    See also

    External links

    Case documents

    Trial court

    Footnotes