meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
Case in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and Culture

#240: The Retirement Episode

Case in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and Culture

The Heritage Foundation

Government

4.5527 Ratings

🗓️ 28 June 2018

⏱️ 25 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Kimberly Robinson from Bloomberg Law joins Elizabeth & Tiffany to break down this week's big decisions (travel ban! Janus! NIFLA! water wars!). They also guess who will be the next Supreme Court justice. Tiffany and Kimberly are in the hot seat for Supreme Trivia - Retirement Edition.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

I'm Elizabeth Lattery and I'm Tiffany Bates.

0:05.5

And welcome to SCOTUS 101, where we break down what's happening at the Supreme Court,

0:09.6

what the justices are up to, and other things related to our favorite branch of government.

0:13.6

This week, we're not talking about much since there was no SCOTUS news.

0:17.4

Just kidding, we're talking about everything that happened this week, and there was a lot.

0:21.8

Before we get into the biggest SCOTUS headline of the week, we'll recap the major decisions

0:25.8

from the past week, and we're joined by Kimberly Robinson of Bloomberg Law. Welcome to SCOTUS 101.

0:31.3

Great to be on. So first up, the court decided the long-awaited years in the making Janus case.

0:37.0

This is the case challenging

0:38.1

compelled agency fees for public employees who declined to join their local union. Mark Janice

0:43.3

is an Illinois state employee, and he opted out of joining the union, but then he discovered he

0:47.9

still had to pay what's called an agency fee to cover the cost of collective bargaining.

0:52.1

Now, that for him, amounted to 78% of a full union member's fees.

0:56.7

Mr. Janice didn't want anything to do with the union in his state,

1:00.9

and it was one that had made large political donations to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund,

1:05.5

among other political causes.

1:07.5

Now, under a 1977 decision, Aboud v versus Detroit Board of Education, the Supreme Court had previously

1:12.8

ruled that unions could collect these fees from non-members to cover their, quote, fair share of

1:18.3

collective bargaining costs. The theory was that the government had a compelling interest in labor

1:22.3

peace for its employees, and also that this prevented free riders from benefiting from

1:27.2

union activities

1:28.2

without paying a fair share.

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from The Heritage Foundation, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of The Heritage Foundation and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.