In a major victory for First Amendment rights, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 27, 2018, in Janus v. AFSCME, that non-union government workers cannot be required to pay union fees as a condition of working in public service. This landmark case restores the First Amendment rights of free speech and freedom of association to more than five million public school teachers, first responders and other government workers across the country.
Mark Janus, plaintiff in the case and a child support specialist for state government in Illinois, offered the following reaction: “I’m thrilled that the Supreme Court has restored not only my First Amendment rights but the rights of millions of other government workers across the country. So many of us have been forced to pay for political speech and policy positions with which we disagree just so we can keep our jobs. This is a victory for all of us. The right to say ‘no’ to a union is just as important as the right to say ‘yes.’ Finally, our rights have been restored.”
Janus filed his case in Illinois in 2015 with free legal representation from the Liberty Justice Center and the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
The Latest: As a result of Janus, more than five million public sector employees across the country are no longer required to pay union dues as a condition of employment. After our victory, the U.S. Supreme Court sent the case back to the lower courts to work out the issue of whether Mark Janus is eligible to receive a refund. Janus’ case continues as he seeks the return of the fees that AFSCME seized from his paycheck without his permission from March 23, 2013, to June 27, 2018, representing the two-year statute of limitations from the date his case started in March 2015 through the Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in his favor.
Background: The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Janus v. AFSCME on Feb. 26, 2018. On the day of oral arguments, a large crowd of public school teachers, other government workers and supporters from across the country rallied outside the Supreme Court on Janus’ behalf, calling on the court to “Stand with Mark” and “Stand With Workers.”
Illinois is among 22 states that have required many government workers to pay union fees as a condition of employment. Plaintiff Mark Janus has worked for state government in Illinois as a child support specialist since 2007. Over the past decade, he was forced to pay thousands of dollars in union fees to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) – even though he opposes many of the union’s positions on public policy issues, felt he would be better off without the union’s so-called representation and was never asked if he wanted to be covered by a union contract. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled in his favor, Janus will not be required to pay these union fees.
The fight over non-member union fees intensified in Illinois in 2015, when Gov. Bruce Rauner filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge in Chicago to declare non-member union fees unconstitutional. Lower courts ruled that the governor did not have standing to bring this suit because he personally was not required to pay union fees. That’s when state worker Mark Janus intervened in the lawsuit with the help of the Liberty Justice Center and National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. The case was renamed Janus v. AFSCME, and Janus was successful in taking this fight all the way to the highest court in the nation.
Help us continue to fight for workers’ constitutional rights, including the protection of Janus rights. Your donations are critical in our ongoing battle to ensure freedom and fairness for workers.
Jeffrey M. Schwab serves as Senior Counsel and Director of Litigation at the Liberty Justice Center, where he litigates cases to protect the rights to free speech, economic liberty, private property and other Constitutional rights in both federal and state courts across the country.
Aaron Withe | July 6, 2026 (The Hill) Last month, we marked eight years since the Supreme Court ruled in Janus v. AFSCME that public employees cannot be forced to pay union dues as a condition of keeping their jobs. Until then, those dues had been mandatory for millions of...
Mark Janus | June 23, 2026 (Washington Examiner) On June 27, 2018, the Supreme Court decided Janus v. AFSCME, overturning Abood v. Detroit Board of Education and restoring First Amendment rights to millions of public-sector workers. The decision was simple but profound: Government employees cannot be forced to subsidize a...
Aaron Withe | June 17, 2026 (New York Post) I run the organization New York is trying to shut down. A few days ago, at the tail end of its legislative session, Albany lawmakers passed a bill giving Attorney General Letitia James sweeping new powers to investigate and fine any...
Aaron Withe | June 14, 2026 (Wall Street Journal) Regarding your editorial “A New York Union Protection Act” (Review & Outlook, June 9): I run the Freedom Foundation, the organization that New York is trying to shut down. Assembly Bill A10835A makes it illegal to “falsely impersonate” a union representative....
By Mark Janus | March 30, 2026 (Wall Street Journal: Opinions) The Sunshine State sides with workers and holds unions accountable to deliver value. Thank you for pointing out in your editorial what should be obvious in union elections (“Florida Leads Again on Public Unions,” Review & Outlook, March 23)....
By Sara Albrecht | February 24, 2026 (National Review) February 24 is not merely an anniversary. It is a reminder that constitutional structure endures only if it is defended. On February 24, 1803, the Supreme Court decided Marbury v. Madison. In doing so, Chief Justice John Marshall wrote words that...
By Mark Janus | Jan 6, 2026 (Wall Street Journal: Opinion) Your editorial “Oregon Punishes the Freedom Foundation” (Dec. 29) hits home. I thought Janus v. Afscme settled the issue that no government can force workers to fund unions they don’t support. I was wrong. Blue states have spent the...
By Linda Jacobson (The74 | October 29, 2025) The former Oklahoma chief inherits a battle with few wins for union detractors. Last year, the conservative Freedom Foundation made headlines with a high-profile effort to convince Miami-Dade teachers to dump their union. Ultimately, it flopped: 83% of members voted to stick...
(Bloomberg Law)—The Trump administration’s attempt to leverage a little-used law covering national security-related workers in order to cancel union contracts across the federal workforce is poised to draw lawsuits claiming it was misapplied to hundreds of thousands of government employees. President Donald Trump on Thursday night directed dozens of federal...
Unions Still Haven’t Accepted Janus
By Mark Janus | June 23, 2026 (Washington Examiner) On June 27, 2018, the Supreme Court decided Janus v. AFSCME, overturning Abood v. Detroit Board of Education and restoring First Amendment rights to millions of public-sector workers. The decision was simple but profound: Government employees cannot be forced to subsidize...