Teachers decry Supreme Court decision on union fees

Teachers in Mountain View and across the state say they are disappointed — though not surprised — by a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that they say hurts the rights of employees who fight for a strong educational environment every year.

The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that public sector employees cannot be forced to pay so-called “fair-share fees” to unions they choose not to join — even if those same employees stand to benefit from collective bargaining and union protections — stating that it violates free speech rights guaranteed under the First Amendment. The plaintiff argued that non-union workers shouldn’t be forced to subsidize private speech that is inherently political.

The decision overturns more than 40 years of precedent set by a previous court decision, and has been roundly criticized by local and statewide unions here in California. The District Teachers Association (DTA), representing hundreds of staff in the Mountain View-Los Altos High School District, released a statement Wednesday calling the high court’s decision a ruling “against working families, public schools, educators and the students we serve.”

“Weakening our unions makes it more difficult for us to stand together to negotiate good wages and benefits. It will be harder for us to fight for the things our students need,” DTA president David Campbell said in the statement.

The California Teachers Association, one of the most powerful unions in the state with 325,000 members, put out a similar statement Wednesday, slamming the decision as a radical interpretation of the First Amendment and the result of “corporate interests who want to rig the economic system further in their favor.” Collective bargaining and “representative power” wielded by CTA has helped fight for billions of dollars in funding for public schools along with better pay for teachers, workplace safety and paid sick days and family leave., according to the statement.

“The decision is the result of well-funded and nationally orchestrated effort to weaken the ability of working men and women to come together as unions and to speak with one, united voice,” said CTA president Eric Heins. “For educators, this an attempt to weaken our ability to stand up on behalf of our students and on behalf of quality public schools.”

The 5-4 decision on the case, Janus v. AFSCME, split down ideological lines, with the conservative majority of judges ruling in favor of the plaintiff. The decision overturns more than 40 years of precedent set by another case, Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, which reaffirmed public sector unions can exact fees on members and non-members alike for the costs of “collective-bargaining, contract administration, and grievance-adjustment purposes.” AFSCME is a national public sector union with 1.6 million members.

But in the court’s decision Wednesday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the long-standing decision coerced individuals into “betraying their convictions” by forcing them to pay for private speech that they may find objectionable. Alito also lays a case for why unions, particularly teacher unions, make decisions during collective bargaining that are deeply political, which can extend well beyond debates on merit-based pay and tenure.

“Unions can also speak out in collective bargaining on controversial subjects such as climate change, the Confederacy, sexual orientation and gender identify, evolution, and minority religions,” Alito wrote in the court’s opinion. “These are sensitive political topics, and they are undoubtedly matters of profound ‘value and concern to the public.'”

Writing the dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan argued that there was no compelling reason to overrule agreed-upon laws related to public sector unions spanning back to 1977, and that the court’s majority sought to “weaponize” the First Amendment to decide winners in a nationwide back-and-forth on the value of unions. Unions can promote healthy labor relations and improve public services or impose excessive costs and impair those services, she wrote, but the five-justice majority sought to intervene in economic and regulatory policy. Speech is a part of “every human activity,” meaning the court’s opinion is unlikely to be the last time the Supreme Court intervenes with its aggressive use of the First Amendment, Kagan argued.

“The majority’s road runs long. And at every stop are black-robed rulers overriding citizens’ choices,” Kagan wrote. “The First Amendment was meant for better things. It was meant not to undermine but to protect democratic governance — including over the role of public-sector unions.”

Campbell told the Voice that he was disappointed but not surprised by the decision, and that the writing was on the wall for a while now. The most clear example was the similar 2016 case Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, which was locked up in a 4-4 ruling due to a vacancy on the bench after Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died. Another case in 2014, Harris v. Quinn, also arguably laid the groundwork for the Janus ruling this week when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of home health care workers in Illinois who argued being forced to pay union fees violated their First Amendment rights.

Given the clear trajectory of the court, Campbell said DTA’s leadership ran a campaign asking local teachers to commit to being a union member regardless of the Janus decision. Of the more than 250 teachers in the district, 220 came back affirming their commitment to DTA, he said, and many more are likely to remain members.

High school teachers in the district pay $924 each year in union dues, $212 of which goes to the District Teachers Association. The largest amount, $677 dollars, goes to the CTA, while $35 goes to the National Education Association. CTA has been a political powerhouse in California, spending hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign spending since 2000, and recently poured $2 million into a committee supporting Tony Thurmond for state superintendent.

Campbell argues that union dues and fair-share fees help fund a whole lot more than negotiating better pay, and said that the DTA has been a strong advocate for students every step of the way. DTA has fought for smaller class sizes — including a reduction in the size of English-language development classes so vulnerable students aren’t crammed “elbow to elbow” in classrooms — and recently sought a new framework for parent-teacher conferences that ensures more students who are in danger of failing get the support that they need, he said.

“Everything we do is driven by what’s best for the students,” Campbell said.

The Janus ruling does not implicate private sector unions, but organized labor groups warn that the language about First Amendment protections could easily extend to all unions. Campbell said it will be interesting to see what happens next, given the major ramifications of the ruling and the announcement that Justice Anthony Kennedy plans to retire.

What Campbell worries about most, he said, is that unions give employees a united voice to fight for a fair wage for hard work, and it’s going to be all the more challenging for families trying to get a leg up and make a decent living.

“It’s frustrating to me because I see unions as a way for a lot of families to get into the middle class,” he said. “But the middle class is suffering, and I don’t see it getting any better with this kind of decision.”

Lane closures planned this weekend for El Camino Real overpass in Mountain ViewJanuary 23, 2026 1:32 pm

Protesters show up for back-to-back anti-ICE protests in Mountain View, Palo Alto22 hours ago

Mountain View planning commission backs 8-story apartment buildingJanuary 22, 2026 2:01 pm