Are laws mandating membership in a state bar association subject to the same 'exacting' First Amendment scrutiny that the Court prescribed for mandatory public-sector union fees in Janus?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Petitioner is an attorney who is required by state law to join and to fund a state bar association as a condition of practicing law. He challenged both compulsory membership and the compulsory funding of the association’s political activities under the First Amendment. This Court vacated and remanded the previous judgment against him for consideration in light of Janus v. AFSCME, 138 S. Ct. 2448 (2018), whereupon the Court of Appeals reaffirmed its prior ruling in all respects, holding that “Janus does not alter our prior decision.” Fleck v. Wetch, 937 F.3d 1112, 1118 (8th Cir. 2019) (App. 18a). The questions presented are: 1. Are laws mandating membership in a state bar association subject to the same “exacting” First Amendment scrutiny that the Court prescribed for mandatory public-sector union fees in Janus? 2. Does it violate the First Amendment to presume that an attorney is willing to pay for a bar association’s “non-chargeable” political and ideological speech, unless and until that attorney takes steps to opt out?