Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Thompson v. AFSCME Council 89, Local 4013

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Thompson v. AFSCME Council 89, Local 4013
Case number: 1:19-cv-00536
Status: Terminated
Important dates
Filed: March 27, 2019
District court decision: July 29, 2019
Appeals court decision:
District court outcome
The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case.

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.

Thompson v. AFSCME Council 89, Local 4013 was terminated before the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on July 29, 2019. The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the claims. In the plaintiff’s original complaint, the plaintiff contended that the union violated his first amendment’s rights by only allowing the plaintiff to opt out of union membership during an annual 15-day period and continually deducting dues from the plaintiff’s paycheck.[1][2][3]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The parties to the suit: The plaintiff was Curtis Thompson. The defendants were American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, District Council 89, Local 4013, Cumberland Valley School District, Steve Mullen, and Frederick S. Withum, III.
  • The issue: The plaintiff was challenging the constitutionality of the union’s 15-day opt out period and continued deduction of dues despite plaintiff’s wish to resign from union membership.
  • The presiding judge(s): Judge Sylvia Rambo. She joined the court in 1979 after being nominated by President Jimmy Carter.
  • The outcome: The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case prior to judgment.
  • Procedural history

    The plaintiff was Curtis Thompson. He was represented by attorneys from The Fairness Center. The defendants were American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, District Council 89, Local 4013, Cumberland Valley School District, Steve Mullen, and Frederick S. Withum, III. They were represented by attorneys from Willig, Williams & Davidson and Johnson, Duffie, Stewart & Weidner.[1]

    The plaintiffs in Thompson v. AFSCME Council 89, Local 4013 first filed their lawsuit on March 27, 2019, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiff challenged the constitutionality of the defendant union’s 15-day opt out period and continued deduction of dues despite plaintiff’s wish to resign from union membership.[1][2][3]

    • March 27, 2019: Plaintiff files complaints seeking damages and summary judgment against defendants.
    • April 15, 2019: Defendants file for an extension of time to reply to the plaintiff’s complaints, which is granted the same day.
    • June 18, 2019: Defendants file for another extension of time to reply to the plaintiff’s complaints, which is granted the next day.
    • July 29, 2019: Plaintiff volunatiry dismisses the complaint.

    For a list of available case documents, click here.

    Decision

    On July 29, 2019, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the claim prior to the court’s judgment.

    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.[4]

    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.[4]

    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."[4]

    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

    Footnotes