Dávila-Surén v. Puerto Rico Industrial Commission

Sonia Dávila-Surén told her employer and union to stop taking dues from her paycheck. They refused.

Sonia M. Dávila-Surén is a public employee who works in the legal department of the Puerto Rico Industrial Commission (PRIC). She never signed a dues-deduction authorization form or otherwise affirmatively consented to have union dues taken from her wages.

Still, twice each month, PRIC takes $15 from Sonia’s paycheck and sends it to Federación Central de Trabajadores, UFCW Local 481. That is $360 a year taken from Sonia to support a union she has repeatedly said she does not want to join or fund.

Liberty Justice Center is representing Sonia in a federal lawsuit challenging PRIC’s continued deduction of union dues without her consent and the union’s efforts to block her from resigning.

Sonia said no. PRIC listened. At first.

In 2018, the Liberty Justice Center won Janus v. AFSCME at the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court held that public employees cannot be forced to subsidize union speech and that union dues cannot be deducted from their wages without their affirmative consent. A waiver of those First Amendment rights cannot simply be presumed.

In September 2020, Sonia submitted a written request to end her union membership and stop the deductions. PRIC honored that request.

But two years later, PRIC reversed course. At the union’s urging, PRIC announced that it was reinstating compulsory union membership and dues deductions for employees in the bargaining unit—including employees like Sonia who were not union members. In December 2022, PRIC began taking dues from Sonia’s paycheck again.

A written “no” should have been enough.

On June 9, 2026, Sonia again wrote to the union and PRIC. She clearly stated that she was resigning from the union and directed them to stop taking dues from her paycheck effective July 1.

At first, PRIC told Sonia that its payroll division would process her request. But the union then insisted that Sonia follow its internal “Disaffiliation Regulation” and appear personally at union headquarters before it would recognize her resignation.

Sonia explained that no meeting was necessary: her decision was final, and she had already communicated it clearly in writing. She later offered to meet with a union representative at her workplace, but she declined to travel to union headquarters to justify or defend her decision.

The union refused to process her resignation. PRIC then reversed its initial response and told Sonia that it would not stop the deductions until the union officially certified that her membership status had changed.

The deductions continued.

The First Amendment does not require an obstacle course.

The union’s written regulation creates a multistep process for employees who want to resign. It restricts how a resignation request may be delivered, requires a second written confirmation after a waiting period, allows the union to summon the employee to an orientation session and permits requests to be processed in administrative cycles.

But Sonia had already made her decision. She communicated it repeatedly, unequivocally and in writing.

The First Amendment does not allow a public employer and a union to treat an employee’s silence as consent—or to disregard her express withdrawal of consent until she completes a union-created obstacle course. A public employer also cannot delegate its constitutional obligations to a union and continue taking money from an employee’s paycheck simply because the union refuses to recognize her resignation.

Defending Sonia’s right to say no.

The lawsuit seeks an order requiring PRIC and the union to stop deductiong and collecting dues from Sonia without her affirmative consent. It also challenges the union’s application of its “Disaffiliation Regulation” to block Sonia’s resignation and PRIC’s decision to condition the end of the deductions on the union’s approval.

The lawsuit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, restitution or compensatory damages for dues taken from Sonia’s wages without her consent, nominal damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

Public employees should not have to repeatedly demand that the government and a union stop taking their money. Sonia said no. The First Amendment requires PRIC and the union to respect her choice.

Dávila-Surén v. Puerto Rico Industrial Commission was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico on August 10, 2026.