CARSON CITY, Nev. – A case that could deal a massive financial blow to public employee unions goes before the U.S. Supreme Court Monday.

The case is called Janus v. the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

The question is whether states have the right to allow public employee unions to charge nonmembers fair share agency fees.

Brian Lee, executive director of the Nevada State Education Association is in Washington to attend the oral arguments Monday.

He says people who exercise their right not to join a union still benefit from the labor agreements the union negotiates, so it's only fair that they contribute.

"The issue here is whether or not the unions must work for free for members who choose not to pay, and whether the states have the state right to structure how they want to interact with their public employees," Lee explains

Nevada and 27 other states have passed laws prohibiting fair share agency fees, which apply to all types of unions. This case could make them illegal nationwide for public employee unions.

Conservative groups argue that no one should be required to contribute to a public employee union that may take political positions with which the person doesn't agree.

However, agency fees, which are typically 50 to 70 percent of the fee to join, cannot by law be used to pay for political advocacy or union elections.

Lee says the case could muffle the voices of teachers nationwide.

"What they will be doing is silencing the ability of teachers to advocate for the best working conditions, for classrooms that have adequate supplies, better student-teacher ratios and for safer and less crowded schools," he points out.

Fair share agency fees for public service unions were legalized in the 1970s in the Abood v. Detroit Board of Education case case.

That case was challenged last year in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, which ended up with a 4-4 tie after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, leaving the fees in place.

Now all eyes will be on conservative justice Neil Gorsuch, who was nominated by President Donald Trump. A decision is expected by June.





get more stories like this via email

Virginia advocates believe more can be done to make higher education accessible to incarcerated people.

Only a handful of community colleges partner with less than half of the state's correctional facilities to help people obtain associate's degrees.

In 2023, incarcerated people became eligible for federal Pell Grants, supporting tuition costs for low-income individuals.

Terri Erwin, director of the Virginia Consensus for Higher Education in Prison, an initiative of the Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy, said the General Assembly can help grow the programs.

"I think that the General Assembly can be kind of a third leg in the stool in supporting the collaboration as it develops between the Department of Corrections and the institutions of higher education," Erwin asserted. "What might be needed depends in part on how those relationships develop."

Higher education's shift to technology was one big challenge in maintaining this access during the pandemic. She noted Virginia did not pivot the same way, yet technology solutions in states such as Tennessee and Maine provided secure learning management and intranet access to incarcerated students. Despite the challenges, higher education in prison has grown nationwide in recent years.

Studies show some benefits of these programs are a 43% reduction in recidivism and a 13% increase in post-release employment. Erwin emphasized the programs can be transformative for people.

"It's an opportunity to reenter society with just one more similarity to folks who have been on the outside all along," Erwin pointed out. "It helps to move past some of the stigma. It gives them a hook to put their hat on as they move forward in looking for jobs and telling the story about who they are."

Formerly incarcerated people reentering society face numerous obstacles. Programs such as SNAP and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families are proven to reduce recidivism by 10% but having a criminal background disqualifies someone's eligibility for both social programs and unemployment insurance.


get more stories like this via email

A new report shows Black girls are enduring disproportionate discipline, sexual harassment and public humiliation from school-based police and security guards in Miami-Dade public schools.

The report, "Keep Her Safe: Centering Black Girls in School Safety," compiles the experiences of Black girls and young women between the ages of 14 and 24, sharing their stories through surveys and focus groups about mistreatment by school safety personnel who make them feel unsafe.

Bayliss Fiddiman, director of educational equity at the National Women's Law Center, which produced the study along with the Southern Poverty Law Center, said the girls were being treated differently for their appearance, often unaware of the lines of sexual harassment.

"The girls express school security guards making inappropriate comments about their appearance that could range from. 'Oh, she looks ghetto,' or 'she's too big to wear that outfit. I would never let my daughter wear that,'" Fiddiman explained.

The report urged the school system to use proven behavioral interventions in such cases, rather than using policing, surveillance and harsh student punishment. Miami-Dade schools has not responded to a request for comment on the study.

Fiddiman pointed out in listening sessions, the girls also did not have a clear understanding of whom to tell if they felt violated. She argued it is an opportunity for school leaders to step in and explain school safety procedures by engaging students in the conversation.

"Schools can definitely implement policies around explaining what sexual harassment is, what boundaries are, what is safe and healthy," Fiddiman recommended. "That was missing."

The report underscored incidents of security using excessive force, such as a 16-year-old Black girl being slammed to the ground, rendering her unconscious and subsequently handcuffed to prevent a fight in 2021. In 2023, a Miami-Dade security guard faced allegations of attempting to seduce three teenage girls.

The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act in response to the 2018 Parkland shooting aimed to bolster school safety. However, it also led to heightened law enforcement presence in schools and increased surveillance measures.


get more stories like this via email

Advocates for the rights of people with disabilities have joined the Montana Quality Education Association in a suit to stop a school voucher bill in the state.

Montana is the latest to enact a plan allowing parents to pay private school tuition with public money. Senate Bill 393 is much more narrowly focused than Educational Savings Accounts in other states. In Montana, the money is limited to reimbursing services for special-education students and those with disabilities.

Rylee Sommers-Flanagan, executive director of Helena-based Upper 7 Law which is overseeing the suit, said Montana's version of Educational Savings Accounts requires special-ed students to renounce their right to a free, quality education under the state constitution and forgo federal assistance.

"In exchange for renouncing that, they can gain access to anywhere between $5,000 and $8,000 annually," Sommers-Flanagan explained. "Which, as we all know, is not enough money to educate a child for a year under any circumstances, let alone a student who may have special needs and may have particularity expensive special needs depending on the circumstances."

School voucher measures are growing across the nation, 29 states now having some form of them. The suit to block the Montana bill was filed in state court in Helena.

In addition to the critics' standard argument which holds funding Educational Savings Accounts with state education money comes at the expense of public K-12 classrooms, Sommers-Flanagan added the accounts will not make enough money available to adequately fund special-needs students anyway.

"It's a lose-lose situation," Sommers-Flanagan contended. "It's incredibly harmful. It appears just to be a gambit to try to privatize public money and to send it to vendors and to folks who have no accountability and no responsibility to genuinely meet the needs of kids who have disabilities in Montana."

Supporters have said they can do a better job educating their own kids than the state can because they understand the students' strengths and weaknesses.