October Term 2008 · Docket 07-869
Can Idaho counties deduct union dues from nonmember paychecks?
the sides that brought the case argue the state law violates the First Amendment. the opposing sides claim the deduction scheme is a valid public policy.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Smith argued the case turns on three specific legal points.
Justice Kennedy explored the principal-agent relationship between the state and counties.
Justice Stevens questioned the distinction between private employers and county agencies.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 41-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 41-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-51 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 31-11 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 31-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-21
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether a state statute can force public employers to deduct union dues from nonmember employees. The dispute centers on the constitutionality of Idaho's checkoff law.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 41-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 41-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 3, 2008.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the Court to strike down the state statute.
the opposing sides want the Court to uphold the state statute.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 41-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 41-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the law compels speech and violates the First Amendment.
the opposing sides argue the law is a permissible public policy measure.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 41-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 41-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if the law has any other practical application.
Justice Stevens asked if counties could choose not to perform deductions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-51 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 31-11 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 31-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-21
Why it matters
The outcome defines the scope of state power over public employee speech. It determines whether states can mandate financial support for unions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 41-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 41-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-51 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 31-11 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 31-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-51 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-21
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 41-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 41-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 41-11 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 41-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.