Last week Friday, the 7th District Federal Appeals Court upheld 2011 Act 10, the budget repair bill that contained changes to the collective bargaining process for public employee unions in Wisconsin, in its entirety. (Link to the decision)
The court upheld the lower court's finding that the collective bargaining provisions "satisfy the rational basis," reversed the the district court's rulings that the recertification provisions and payroll deduction provisions do not satisfy rational basis and affirmed the district court's denial of proposed intervenors' motion to intervene.
Specific to Act 10's payroll deduction prohibition for union dues, the court found:
"Act 10's payroll deduction prohibitions do not violate the First Amendment. The Unions offer several different First Amendment theories to rebut the compelling deference of rational basis review required under applicable law. Ultimately, none apply because the Supreme Court has settled the question: use of the state's payroll systems to collect union dues is a state subsidy of speech that requires only viewpoint neutrality.
Admittedly, the Unions do offer some evidence of viewpoint discrimination in the words of then-Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald suggesting Act 10, by limiting unions' fundraising capacity, would make it more difficult for President Obama to carry Wisconsin in the 2012 presidential election. While Senator Fitzgerald's statement may not reflect the highest of intentions, his sentiments do not invalidate an otherwise constitutional, viewpoint neutral law. Consequently, Act 10's prohibition on payroll dues deduction does not violate the First Amendment. "
Below please find reaction to the court's ruling:
Governor Scott Walker's reaction to the decision:
"As we've said all along, Act 10 is constitutional.
Today's court ruling is a victory for Wisconsin taxpayers. The provisions contained in Act 10, which have been upheld in federal court, were vital in balancing Wisconsin's $3.6 billion budget deficit without increasing taxes, without massive public employee layoffs, and without cuts to programs like Medicaid. With this ruling behind us, we can now focus on the next state budget, which will invest in priorities to move our state forward."
Attorney General JB Van Hollen's (R-Waunakee) reaction:
"For nearly two years, those opposing Act 10 have tried every angle to have it struck down and invalidated. Today's decision by the Seventh Circuit confirms what I have stated from the beginning. Act 10 is constitutional. While there are no guarantees, it is my hope that this decision will pave the way for resolving any remaining challenges in a manner that supports the legislative decisions made by our elected officials."
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester):
"Today's federal court ruling confirms what we've known all along: Act 10 is constitutional. What we've seen in this case--and with so many others before it--is that a liberal Dane County judge made a political, not a legal, decision."
"These reforms have played an important role in balancing budgets at the state and local levels. I encourage those who have not utilized these tools to begin incorporating them to the benefit of taxpayers."
Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) President Mary Bell's reaction:
"What is so abundantly clear is that Act 10 was never about addressing the fiscal needs of the state but instead a ploy to eliminate workers' rights to have a voice through their union - political payback for citizens who didn't endorse the governor," WEAC President Mary Bell said. "This marks a setback, but the fact of the matter is that our members will not give up on their commitment to restoring their rights to negotiate for fair wages and safe working conditions."
Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca (D-Kenosha):
"While the Seventh Circuit Court upheld Act 10 on narrow legal grounds, the court did acknowledge that Act 10 appears to be an act of favoritism for 'friends' and punishing enemies. While that approach may be legal, the Judge David Hamilton notes that 'the United States Constitution does not forbid all legislation that rewards friends and punishes opponents.'
"Given the recent focus on bipartisanship, now would be a good opportunity to move away from positions the court acknowledges are likely favoritism and punishment. We must find real solutions the Wisconsin way of sitting down together and rolling up our sleeves to tackle problems with all stakeholders to repair some of the damage that has been done by this law. We are not a state that should have laws in place to settle partisan vendettas."
Senate Minority Leader Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee):
"Today's ruling by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals is an immense setback for Wisconsin's middle class families who are already suffering a lack of job creation," said Senate Democratic Leader Chris Larson. "After half a century of labor progress in Wisconsin, upholding this divisive legislation will only hurt Wisconsin's working, middle class families. The 7th Circuit's determination that the calculated protection of political favorites and the targeting of political foes is constitutionally permissible is a sad deterioration of our Wisconsin values."
