Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Lucille S. Taylor v. James W. Heath, President-Elect, State Bar of Michigan Board of Commissioners, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 20-2002 · judgment July 15, 2021
Before the decision, roughly the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a petition filed soon after the judgment below, a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition), and a Sixth Circuit decision below, and down for a state or local-government respondent.
Question presented
In Janus v. AFSCME, 138 S.Ct. 2448 (2018), this Court held that laws that impinge on public-sector employees’ First Amendment rights are subject to “exacting” scrutiny. Janus held that forcing public employees to subsidize a union’s speech and advocacy of public positions violated those employees’ First Amendment rights. Prior to Janus, the Court had developed two lines of case law together, frequently alternating and each building on the other—the aforementioned public-sector employees and whether they could be forced to fund a union—and attorneys and whether they could be forced to join and fund an integrated bar association. After Janus held that such compulsion in the union context was impermissible, the question is: Can the State of Michigan compel practicing attorneys to fund an integrated bar association that takes policy positions, or does such a law fail exacting scrutiny and violate the attorneys’ First Amendment rights?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Derk Arend Wilcox
Mackinac Center Legal Foundation
For respondent
John J. Bursch
Bursch Law PLLC
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences
Proceedings
- Apr 04 2022Petition DENIED.
- Mar 16 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/1/2022.
- Dec 29 2021Rescheduled.
- Dec 22 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
- Dec 14 2021Letter of December 2, 2021 regarding substitution of parties received from counsel for the respondents.
- Dec 10 2021Reply of petitioner Lucille Taylor filed.
- Dec 03 2021Brief of respondents Dana M. Warnez, et al. in opposition filed.
- Sep 22 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 6, 2021.
- Sep 21 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 7, 2021 to December 6, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
- Sep 21 2021Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Dennis Barnes, et al.
- Sep 21 2021Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Lucille Taylor
- Sep 01 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 7, 2021)