Whether a law that prevents anyone but incumbent unions from accessing information necessary to communicate with public employees before they are recruited into union membership is unlawful viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment

On June 27, 2018, the day this Court decided Janus v. Am. Fed’n of State, Cnty., & Mun. Emps., Council 31, the California legislature openly declared war on that decision by passing a series of laws to prevent Janus from having its full intend ed effect. One of those laws was California Government Code § 3556 (“Section 3556”), which forb ids anyone but incumbent labor unions from finding out when and where new public employee orientations o ccur. At these orientations, public sector unions manipulate new employees into becoming union members an d intentionally conceal employees’ Janus rights to refuse to join a union or pay dues. California employs 3.5 million public employees, 280,000 of which go through new employee orientation every year. The Freedom Foundation, and others, seek to speak to these public employees outside of their orientations to inform them of their Janus rights, but under Section 3556 cannot do so because they are forbidden from knowing when and where these orientations occur. The question presented is: Whether a law that prevents anyone but incumbent unions from accessing information necessary to communicate with public employees before they are recruited into union membership is unlawful viewpoint discrimination under the First Amendment.