Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x4 - Rauner response *** Cullerton: Rauner budget “unworkable” and “unconscionable”
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Posted in:
* From a press release…
Attorney General Lisa Madigan today filed a motion to intervene in Governor Bruce Rauner’s federal lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of “fair share” fees as allowed under the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act. Madigan issued the following statement outlining her role in this litigation:
“Last month, Governor Rauner issued an Executive Order seeking to stop the payment of ‘fair share’ fees used to support non-political union activities such as contract administration and collective bargaining. On the same day, he also sued over two dozen unions in federal court in anticipation of a legal challenge to his Executive Order in state court.
Last week, the unions filed suit in state court seeking to prohibit Governor Rauner from implementing his Executive Order and breaching their contracts and to restore the ‘fair share’ fee payments.
Today, I filed a motion to intervene in the federal lawsuit to defend the constitutionality of Illinois’ law. Along with the motion to intervene, I have submitted a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that the Governor does not have the legal authority to sue to challenge the law in federal court.
As Attorney General, it is my job to represent the state and defend our laws when their constitutionality is challenged in court. Because the Governor’s case questions the validity of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act, I moved to intervene to provide the court with arguments regarding the law’s constitutionality.”
The motion is here. The accompanying memorandum is here.
*** UPDATE *** Lance Trover…
“As expected, the Attorney General filed a motion in federal court to defend so-called ‘fair share’ union dues in state government, which is why the Governor pro-actively asked the Attorney General’s office to allow the Governor’s office to use pro bono outside counsel. The Attorney General’s actions will have no impact on the Governor’s efforts to protect taxpayers and state employees who don’t want to pay forced union dues.”
…Adding… From AG Madigan’s memorandum…
[Madigan’s] motion emphasizes the following points. First, the Governor may not use this suit as a preemptive strike against an anticipated state court law suit against him for violating state law in which he could assert federal law only as a defense to the state-law claims. Second, the Governor is not complaining of any violation of his own First Amendment rights, but instead has claimed the ability to vindicate the First Amendment rights of other persons who are not before this Court. Third, the Governor is inappropriately asking a federal court to declare the scope of his authority to issue executive orders under state law.
.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:11 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x4 - Rauner response *** Cullerton: Rauner budget “unworkable” and “unconscionable”
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
===Today, I filed a motion to intervene in the federal lawsuit to defend the constitutionality of Illinois’ law. Along with the motion to intervene, I have submitted a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that the Governor does not have the legal authority to sue to challenge the law in federal court.===
There is the which court issue is rebuffed..
===Because the Governor’s case questions the validity of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act, I moved to intervene to provide the court with arguments regarding the law’s constitutionality.”====
Here is where that IL constitutional part is taken to task.
Litigation. That ain’t governin’.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:14 pm
OW, and so it begins. This ain’t going to be pretty. The honeymoon is over and the tux ain’t even returned yet…
Comment by allknowingmasterofracoondom Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:18 pm
A legitimate question is why she approved appointing a Special Assistant Attorney General to file the Governor’s suit in the first place. She could have blocked it from the beginning instead of giving Gov. Rauner a platform for his political agenda and could have saved taxpayer dollars.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:19 pm
Step in for the Government Union Bosses, sit on the sidelines while the feds weed out corruption in Illinois. (Predicted Rauner response)
Comment by ABC Lawyer Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:19 pm
welcome to your next four years with the Madigans!
Comment by Amalia Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:29 pm
=== She could have blocked it from the beginning===
I don’t think so.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:32 pm
Last week Rauner said he would “take the arrows.” It’s starting to look like the Roman Army out there!
Comment by Sangamo Sam Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:34 pm
So the bottom line is BOTH side’s lawyers are paid by the State of Illinois. The state is sort of fighting itself.
Comment by DuPage Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:37 pm
Mr Governor, this ain’t Wisconsin.
Comment by Casual Observer Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:37 pm
If state employees shouldn’t have to pay “forced union dues,” why should I have to pay forced government taxes?
Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:38 pm
Also, “Us v. Them”…”governin’…”
That isn’t governing too.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:41 pm
==As Attorney General, it is my job to represent the state and defend our laws when their constitutionality is challenged in court.==
The many union members whose pension theft you are defending thank you.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:42 pm
This all points to a government lockout.
It’ll take the courts to force the workers back. Rauner’s plan, as he’s said from the get-go, is to fire everybody and rewrite the contracts.
What a repugnant, repugnant man.
Comment by Macbeth Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:43 pm
Yes, Lance you expected the AG to protect State law as is her job. Following the law is a unique concept to our new Gov.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:49 pm
Governor, we have laws and a Constitution. Just because you want something your way does not mean that you will get it. Now, get off the floor and quit rolling around screaming, “Waaa! I want to be so it has to be!!”
Comment by Nearly Normal Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:51 pm
Well said, Willy.
Governing is work. Lawsuits and ==my way== are often ==easier== for politicians than working to a compromise. More expensive too, but it’s not their money.
That goes for fair share fees, pension reductions, the budget and nearly everything else these days.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:52 pm
This kinda reinforces the fact that Rauner has no standing to file his lawsuit. Bets on when the Fed Court will toss it?
Comment by Norseman Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:53 pm
Hey Rich, I think your blog needs a Daylight Savings Update. My post above was at 5:51 p.m. CDT
Comment by Nearly Normal Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:53 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1gX0SxtidI
Comment by New Guy Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 4:56 pm
Hahaha! Take that, BVR!
BVR: “This losin’ at the district court and court of appeals is all part of my master plan that y’all can’t figure out. I just like spendin’ other people’s money and wastin’ time. 46 months to go!”
Comment by Anon Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 5:05 pm
Nearly Normal, it’s Miller time!
Comment by Juice Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 5:07 pm
Macbeth, somebody here said every employee he locks out gets to collect unemployment. I guess he’s willing to run that bill up too.
Comment by Anon Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 5:10 pm
To the AG’s Memorandum update,
The Governor has his work cut out for his case.
Thanks - FKA -, I think we are at the point in this where Rauner isn’t making it about good government, but about Rauner trying to have the courts dictate a policy, in a court where the policy “case” has no standing(?)
- allknowingmasterofracoondom -, the courts are a weird place to end a honeymoon…
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 5:24 pm
Sorry, King Rauner. It ain’t workin’ out for you.
Comment by Wensicia Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 5:26 pm
“state employees who don’t want to pay forced union dues”
“Traditional” state employees (not home healthcare workers) had years to file a lawsuit against fair share fees but didn’t. That silence says they’re okay with fair share fees.
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 5:31 pm
It is rather difficult to imagine how Rauner recovers from these unforced errors. Every new governor gets a bagful of good will to start off with, and Rauner has pretty much emptied his out.
Comment by DuPage Dave Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 5:41 pm
@ Dupage Dave - Rauner doesn’t have a plan he has an agenda. At this point I don’t think he really concerns himself with the consequences of his actions.
Comment by pundent Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 5:49 pm
Anon at 5:10. That money is paid by the employers of the State, not tax revenues from the fund. One of the biggest misconceptions in the history of State Government. You lay off like two people a year, you pay the highest rate. So what does he care about that? Probably nothing.
Comment by Indeterminate Sentence Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 5:56 pm
In other words, your share as an employer is in no way directly related to the amount of your gross payroll or whatever. Not a perfect system, but many IDES recipients think it is their “tax money anyway” and it is not.
Comment by Indeterminate Sentence Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 6:01 pm
IS, I was talking about state employees. Since the state is the employer who pays the unemployment compensation?
Comment by Anon Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 6:11 pm
I do not know if the State pays into the same insurance fund as all other employers. Good point. If it is separate, it’s on the taxpayers like everything else in Government. If it is combined with all other “premiums”, who knows? Pretty arcane stuff.
Comment by Indeterminate Sentence Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 6:23 pm
As expected playing the victim card again ,if you could only use pro bono to fulfill your mandate.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 7:56 pm
I’m pretty sure the state doesn’t pay into the unemployment trust fund and they just pay out benefits as they are due unlike traditional employers (similar to workers comp). The main reason is there is no fear that the state will go insolvent. At least that was the reasoning when the law was passed.
Comment by Salty Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 8:54 pm
@Salty
The state unemployment compensation and work comp for employees self-insured
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Mar 9, 15 @ 9:25 pm
I believe that all of the rules pertaining to eligibility for unemployment benefits are exactly the same for State of Illinois employees as any other person filing for benefits under the State of Illinois Unemployment Insurance Act. When a former state employee files for benefits it goes thru the same process as any other individual. The state agency that the employee worked for would receive notice indicating the agency is charged with that claim. This notice also affords the agency the right to protest the claim. If the agency or any other employer protest the claim, the claim would go thru an adjudication process to resolve any issue on the claim.
The more important question, at least for me, IDES is a state agency as well, so who is going to be around to see that that benefits are paid if locked out? Yes much of the process is done online, but there still has to be some hands on……
And yes I believe that since it is charged to applicable state agency the taxpayers will be picking up the tab once again.
Comment by Clodhopper Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 12:11 am
Governor Walker across the border yesterday signed into law the ban on private sector fair share agreements. This is the ultimate goal of Governor Rauner for Illinois. The litigation at hand is just part of a process to get to the larger objective.
Assuming the Supreme Court strikes down SB 1 pension reform the Governor will go on the offensive against all public sector unions as part of an austerity plan. The Governor will have the financial backing of right to work organizations and wealthy conservatives for a media campaign to convince the majority of voters of the need to lower the average wage of public sector workers. What we are seeing now is a low cost effort on the part of Rauner and his supporters, it is just the first shots of a war to come.
It will either work like it did in Wisconsin bringing with it a Republican majority in the legislature or it will fail. Only time will which way things will go.
Comment by Rod Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 4:59 am
-Rod-
Spot on analysis. Problem for Rauner. This ain’t Wisconsin
Comment by sparky791 Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 7:10 am
= to Rich at 4:32 =
See the Motion to Intervene itself pointing to the AG common law powers as the one officer of the state that can represent the State. That includes reading those cases and some more.
While there is a long-standing courtesy that AG’s have let Governors hire lawyers for litigation, she did not have to allow it here.
The outcome is that even though Rauner has “pro bono” representation, the AG has had to devote a lot of time responding in court over the argument that the Governor does not have this power. Ms. Madigan could have refused to appoint the Special AAG and the political fight that is inevitable would play out in the public forum instead of an expensive judicial one.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 7:26 am
test
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 9:03 am
I realize the way to go these days in right wing politics is constant obsfucation and obstruction, but it usually harms the executive. The only thing he’s accomplishing is throwing a lot of he middle class and unions into the arms of the Madigans. It’s early, but geez if the election was Lisa vs Bruce tomorrow, it feels like it’d be a walk.
Comment by The Equalizer Tuesday, Mar 10, 15 @ 10:14 am