Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/16-1466_2b3j.pdf
Page Number: 38.0

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

33 

Opinion of the Court 

We  readily  acknowledge,  as  Pickering  did,  that  “the 
State  has  interests  as  an  employer  in  regulating  the 
speech of its employees that differ significantly from those 
it possesses in connection with regulation of the speech of
the citizenry in general.”  391 U. S., at 568.  Our analysis
is  consistent  with  that  principle.    The  exacting  scrutiny
standard  we  apply  in  this  case  was  developed  in  the  con­
text  of  commercial  speech,  another  area  where  the  gov­
ernment  has  traditionally  enjoyed  greater-than-usual 
power to regulate speech.  See supra, at 10.  It is also not 
disputed that the State may require that a union serve as
exclusive  bargaining  agent  for  its  employees—itself  a 
significant  impingement  on  associational  freedoms  that
would not be tolerated in other contexts.  We simply draw
the line at allowing the government to go further still and 
require  all employees  to  support  the  union  irrespective  of 
whether  they  share  its  views.  Nothing  in  the  Pickering
line of cases requires us to uphold every speech restriction
the  government  imposes  as  an  employer.  See  Pickering, 
supra, at 564–566 (holding teacher’s dismissal for criticiz­
ing  school  board  unconstitutional);  Rankin  v.  McPherson, 
483  U. S.  378,  392  (1987)  (holding  clerical  employ-
ee’s  dismissal  for  supporting  assassination  attempt  on 
President  unconstitutional);  Treasury  Employees,  513 
U. S.,  at  477  (holding  federal-employee  honoraria  ban 
unconstitutional). 

VI 
For  the  reasons  given  above,  we  conclude  that  public-
sector  agency-shop  arrangements  violate 
the  First 
Amendment,  and  Abood  erred  in  concluding  otherwise. 
There remains the question whether stare decisis nonethe­
less counsels against overruling Abood.  It does not. 
—————— 

balance would come out.  The term “agitat[ion]” can encompass a wide
range  of  conduct,  as  well  as  speech.    Post,  at  17.  And  the  time  and 
place of the agitation would also be important.