The Supreme Court kicked
off its new session Monday morning, with Justice Neil Gorsuch on the
bench for his first full term and the justices immediately diving into a
hot-button labor dispute.
Numerous other challenges are on the docket for this term, covering
everything from religious liberty to union dues to voter redistricting.
Consideration of President Trump’s controversial travel ban is on hold,
though the issue nevertheless looms over arguments.
But first up Monday was a clash between businesses and employees,
focused on how workers can complain about pay, conditions and other
issues. In a rare split, the dispute pitted Justice Department lawyers
against those from the National Labor Relations Board.
At issue are contracts employers want to enforce that prevent workers
from pursuing group claims in court. The case involves workers who tried
to sue a Murphy Oil USA gas station in Calera, Alabama, but had
contracts requiring any dispute be settled in individual arbitration.
Employees say going it alone is too costly and makes it impossible to
pool resources for a lawyer.
Lower courts have split over whether the agreements are enforceable. And
so have federal agencies.
The NLRB originally had found the requirement violates federal labor
laws. But the Trump administration reversed the Obama administration's
position in support of the NLRB.
The result is that government lawyers representing the Justice
Department and the NLRB opposed each other in court Monday. While the
Justice Department contended the businesses should win, the NLRB argued
the workers should be protected.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
said earlier she's never seen such a split in nearly 25 years on the
high court. During arguments Monday, Ginsburg seemed to speak for the
court's liberal wing, saying the importance of collective action is
"there is strength in numbers. You have to protect the individual worker
in a situation where he can't protect himself."
But Chief Justice John Roberts sounded concerned about a ruling for the
workers, which he said "would invalidate contracts for 25 million
employees." That's the estimated number of non-union workers who have
contracts with the individual arbitration provision.
Unlike last October, the justices convened Monday with a full bench,
after Trump earlier this year installed Gorsuch to fill the vacancy left
by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death.
One high-profile case could disappear, at least for now. The court
canceled the Oct. 10 argument over Trump's travel ban after the
president announced a new policy last week that differs from the one the
justices had decided to review.
Still, many important cases remain that touch on gay rights and
religious freedoms, the polarized American electorate, the government's
ability to track people without search warrants, states' rights to allow
betting on professional and college sporting events and the ability of
labor unions that represent government employees to collect "fair share"
fees for contract negotiations from workers who don't support the
unions.
And speculation has not receded over another possible vacancy in the
near future.
Sources close to Justice Anthony Kennedy say he has been seriously
considering retirement and may not stay on the bench for Trump's entire
first term. Rumors were at a blustery pitch that he would step down last
June, but the new term begins with the 81-year-old justice on board, his
unique power base intact.
His influence as the court's "swing" member -- the deciding vote on a
range of high-profile cases from gay marriage to immigration to abortion
-- has left his seat coveted by those on the right and left. Replacing
him would launch an epic political fight, and could prove a boost to the
Trump presidency itself.
For now, Kennedy's moderating presence could blunt the Trump agenda and
that of fellow conservative Republicans. Other court watchers wonder
about the plans of the liberal Ginsburg, at 84 the oldest member of the
court.
Fox News’ Bill Mears and The Associated Press contributed to this
report. |
|