NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RYAN CRAM; et al., 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

and

BARBARA GRABBEL; et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v. 

SERVICE EMPLOYEES 

INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 503, 

OREGON PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION, 

a labor organization and KATY COBA, in 

her official capacity as Director of the 

Oregon Department of Administrative 

Services,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 22-35321 

D.C. No. 6:20-cv-00544-MK

U.S. District Court for Oregon, 

Eugene

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the U.S. District Court

for the District of Oregon

Mustafa Kasubhai, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 19, 2023 

San Francisco, California

Before: W. FLETCHER, NGUYEN, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

FILED

OCT 23 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

Plaintiffs are Oregon State employees who voluntarily joined the Service 

Employees International Union Local 503 (“Union”), the exclusive bargaining 

representative for their unit. Plaintiffs signed membership agreements that 

authorized the deduction of “all Union dues and other fees or assessments.”

Plaintiffs later resigned their union membership, and the Union notified them that 

their deductions would continue until the window period for revoking authorization.

1

 

Plaintiffs raise First Amendment claims against the Union and Katy Coba, Director 

of the Oregon Department of Administrative Services, under Section 1983. The 

district court granted summary judgment for defendants. We have jurisdiction under 

28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

1. Plaintiffs assert that they were not given an informed choice about 

whether to pay the $2.75 per month “Issues Fund” fee, which amounts to a political 

charge, and that the deduction procedure was impermissibly controlled by the Union. 

See Knox v. Serv. Emps. Int’l Union, Loc. 1000, 567 U.S. 298, 316 (2012). Plaintiffs

argue that they were not members of the Union when they originally executed their 

membership agreements and that, after they resigned their union membership, they 

became nonmembers. But the “procedural safeguards” that protect nonmembers

from the risk of compelled political speech do not apply here since Plaintiffs were 

1 Plaintiff Ryan Cram is the only exception. His payroll deductions terminated 

shortly after his resignation of membership.
3 

voluntary union members. See Knox, 567 U.S. at 316; Belgau v. Inslee, 975 F.3d 

940, 951–52 (9th Cir. 2020) (rejecting the argument that the language in Janus v. 

Am. Fed’n of State, Cnty., & Mun. Emps., Council 31, 138 S. Ct. 2448, 2486 (2018)

about “waiver” applies to union members at the time they enter into their 

membership agreement).

2. Plaintiffs similarly assert that under Janus, defendants

unconstitutionally deduced political charges from their wages as nonmembers

because there is not “clear and compelling evidence” that they waived their First 

Amendment rights. But this Court has held that Janus does not reach those “who 

affirmatively signed up to be union members.” Belgau, 965 F.3d at 944.

3. The Union also did not engage in state action. See Lugar v. Edmondson 

Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922 (1982). Any harm from the union deductions is caused by the

membership agreements which Plaintiffs freely signed. On similar facts, we 

declined to find state action under Lugar in Belgau, 975 F.3d at 946–47.

Nor is the Union a state actor under the “joint action” or “governmental 

nexus” tests that guide our analysis under Lugar’s second prong. See Tsao v. Desert 

Palace, Inc., 698 F.3d 1128, 1140 (9th Cir. 2012). The state’s transmission of an 

assessment to a union after an employee authorizes such deductions does not give 

rise to a section 1983 claim against the union under the “joint action” test. See

Belgau, 975 F.3d at 947–49. Similarly, “ministerial processing of payroll deductions 
4 

pursuant to [e]mployees’ authorizations” does not create a nexus between the state 

and the Union. Id. at 947–48 & n.2.

AFFIRMED.