Supremes weaken home care workers' rights

The Supreme Court issued yet another blow against working Americans today in the case of Harris v. Quinn.

The high court ruled 5 to 4 - with the usual crew of Federalist Society ideologues in the majority - that unions representing home care workers don't have to collect fair share fees from workers they represent who are classed as public workers. This ruling forces union workers to subsidize nonunion labor.

This decision flies in the face of the Constitution's safeguards against uncompensated labor, impairment of contracts, and freedom of association. It even weakens the longstanding Abood v. Detroit Board of Education ruling that protects worker rights. It's almost like having a misnamed "right-to-work" law that applies to public home care employees.

Many folks feared today's ruling would be much broader. Some worried that the court would write a federal "right-to-work" law that would have decimated the rights of all workers - public and private, in all occupations. I am firmly convinced that warnings of nationwide labor protests warded off such a sweeping decision. There was serious talk on some websites of a major pushback by workers if a wider ruling was imposed. Then again, it's not like we shouldn't fight back anyway.