SCOTUSblog, the top source of information on the United States Supreme Court, reports that the United States Solicitor General has weighed in, urging the Supreme Court to hear the appeal of the California Chamber of Commerce in a case challenging the validity of California's labor "neutrality" law. From the report:
The federal government has asked the Court to consider a challenge to a California law barring private employers who receive state money from using the funds to influence union organizing campaigns. The recommendation, filed on Friday in support of a Chamber of Commerce petition, argues that the National Labor Relations Act preempts the California statute, and that an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit created a circuit split in holding otherwise. Click here to read the government brief, and the following links to read the petition, brief in opposition, and reply.
The law in question, enacted in September 2000, prohibits entities that receive state money from using the funds to “assist, promote, or deter union organizing,” including “any attempt of an employer to influence the decision of its employees” over whether to support or join a labor union. The Chamber of Commerce had successfully challenged the law in district court and before a Ninth Circuit panel before the en banc ruling.
Professor Paul Secunda, who writes at the Workplace Prof Blog, says (accurately in my view) "Look for the Court to grant [the appeal] and overturn the Ninth Circuit."
Prof. Secunda also thinks that decision could have a detrimental effect on so-called "Worker Freedom Act" bills pending in state legislatures, including quite prominently our own.
We know this employer gag-rule by the moniker "Union Neutrality" -- which in its broadest form has no "public funds" limitation -- and the state AFL-CIO has promised that passing it will be among its top 2008 legislative priorities.
We've discussed the issue at OBW, including here, here, and here, and very much look forward to the Supreme Court's decision whether to take the California case and resolve the preemption issue.
