U.S. District Judge Renee Marie Bumb in Camden, New Jersey. Photo by Carmen Natale/ALM

A federal judge in Camden has dismissed two class action lawsuits brought on behalf of public school teachers who called some aspects of the collection of union dues unconstitutional in the wake of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

In the pair of lawsuits brought against New Jersey teachers' unions after the Supreme Court's ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, the plaintiffs sought a refund of union fees charged to nonmembers before the landmark June 2018 ruling, and claimed the right to withdraw from a dues collection agreement at any time.

The justices in Janus said that so-called fair share agreements, which required public-sector employees to pay dues even if they decline to join the union, violate the First Amendment. The decision overturned a long-standing precedent, Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, which held that fair share fees did not violate the First Amendment rights of nonmember public employees as long as certain safeguards were observed, and the fees assessed represented the cost of collective bargaining and not political spending.

U.S. District Judge Renee Bumb declined to order a retroactive refund of union dues paid by nonunion teachers before the Janus decision came out. Bumb also declined to allow teachers to revoke their union dues authorization at any time, finding that an opt-out procedure allowing members to do so only on certain dates is not unduly burdensome.

Bumb's Nov. 27 ruling follows other efforts by judges across the country to apply and interpret the Janus ruling. Like most other judges to take up the issue, Bumb narrowly applied the Supreme Court's holding.

In December 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a public employee union did not violate the First Amendment rights of employees when it continued to collect dues after they quit the union. Affirming a lower court's decision in favor of the union and the state of Washington, the Ninth Circuit said the deduction of union dues in accordance with an irrevocability provision in the union's membership cards did not violate the workers' First Amendment rights.

Pennsylvania has seen multiple post-Janus suits. The Western District of Pennsylvania dismissed a claim in July for repayment of fair share fees paid before Janus. In September, the Middle District of Pennsylvania also rejected a former union member's request for the return of dues paid pre- and post-Janus. The court found that a former union member lacked standing to bring claims on behalf of former fair share fee payors, and that even if she had standing, the good-faith defense would bar recovery of pre-Janus fees paid to the union.

In the New Jersey litigation, six teachers in the Clearview Regional District in Gloucester County sued their district and various labor unions to object to their continued payment of union membership fees. They claimed that the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act, which allows them to revoke union dues authorization on certain dates, restricts their First Amendment rights.

In a separate suit, two teachers in the Ocean Township district in Monmouth County, who never joined their union for ideological reasons, sought a refund of fees paid before the Janus ruling.

Bumb declined to order retrospective monetary relief, finding the union dues authorizations signed by plaintiffs were valid and enforceable contracts. Bumb found that retrospective relief was not warranted because the deduction of fees from nonmembers was conducted in good-faith reliance on the Supreme Court's Abood decision.

Bumb also found that Clearview teachers who claimed the right to opt out of payment of dues at any time suffered no harm and therefore lacked Article III standing to sue. The suit claimed a state statute limited such opt-outs to one, 10-day window each year. Bumb said that such a draconian requirement would be an unconstitutional restriction on First Amendment rights if enforced as written. But the record shows the Clearview union gave teachers three dates per year in which they could halt their payment of dues.

"Based on the record, the member plaintiffs cannot establish that they have suffered (or are likely to suffer) an 'injury-in-fact' to their First Amendment rights," Bumb wrote.

The defendants also included the New Jersey Education Association, which welcomed the decision. "We are pleased that the judge made the correct ruling. We have always followed the law scrupulously. We will continue to provide outstanding representation for every NJEA member," said Steve Baker, a spokesman for the NJEA.

Patrick Semmens, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation, which represented the plaintiffs in the Ocean Township suit, said his group disagrees with the ruling and expects to appeal.