The Wall Street Journal’s Best of the Web column today succinctly and clearly summarizes the historical Janus decision:
This is a groundbreaking win for public employees… in New York and other states where they have long been compelled to support inherently political activities as a condition of employment. Roughly 200,000 New York government workers who chose not to join unions immediately stand to save over $110 million a year. Another one million who signed union membership cards, believing they’d have no choice but to pay the union, will have the option to reconsider.
Unfortunately, the article is hidden behind their paywall.
Janus is in and public sector unions are not permitted to require non-members to pay union dues as first amendment right. The opinon (summarized here) can be read in its entirety here. The rationale behind today’s Ruling is concisely explained by Thomas Jefferson:
“To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.“
Lost in the Left’s wailing and gnashing of teeth, donning sack cloth, and self-flaggelation is the notion that if a public sector union wants to recruit new (and retain existing) members, they will focus their efforts on making union membership attractive. The real reason for the angst among the Left and Democrats (but I repeat myself) is that a huge source of funding for the Democrat party has just now vanished. Poof!
The Mysterious Seven Preludes of the FBI’s Trump-Russia Probe.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation formally opened its Trump investigation after Western intelligence assets and Clinton-affiliated political operatives repeatedly approached the Trump campaign and tried but failed to damage it through associations with Russia, a growing body of evidence suggests.
Before the FBI began investigating the Trump campaign in an operation code-named “Crossfire Hurricane,” there were at least seven different instances when campaign advisers were approached with Russia-related offers. Most of those contacts — including Donald Trump Jr.’s much-publicized meeting with a Russian lawyer and others in June 2016 — offered the prospect of information damaging to Donald Trump’s Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton.
Two of these approaches were made by one U.S. government informant already publicly identified as such, Stefan Halper. Another was made by a man who swore in court that he had worked as an FBI informant. Two others were made by figures associated with Western intelligence agencies. Another two approaches included political operatives, one foreign, with ties to the Clintons.
President Obama’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, has asserted that dispatching Halper to follow the Trump campaign “protected” it from the Russians.
But Mark Wauck, a former FBI agent with experience in such tactics, sees an effort at entrapment.