Judge dismisses Zimmerman's lawsuit against NBC

ORLANDO, Fla. — A Florida judge on Monday dismissed the defamation lawsuit filed by George Zimmerman against NBC and three reporters, saying the former neighborhood watch leader failed to show the network acted with malice.

Judge Debra Nelson said the malice standard was appropriate because Zimmerman became a public figure after he shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford in February 2012, generating a national conversation about race and self-defense laws.

Zimmerman was acquitted last year for Martin's shooting. He said he shot Martin in self-defense when the teenager attacked him. Martin was black. Zimmerman identifies himself as Hispanic.

Zimmerman "voluntarily injected his views into the public controversy surrounding race relations and public safety in Sanford and pursued a course of conduct that ultimately led to the death of Martin and the specific controversy surrounding it," said Nelson, who presided over Zimmerman's criminal trial last summer.

In his lawsuit, Zimmerman said NBC's editing of a story on the shooting made it sound as if Zimmerman voluntarily told an operator that Martin was black. He was actually responding to a dispatcher's question about the Miami teen's race. Zimmerman said the broadcasts made his seem like a racist and exposed him to public ridicule and threats. He was seeking damages for emotional distress and mental anguish.

Zimmerman also said he was defamed when an NBC reporter said he uttered a racial slur during the call with the dispatcher. Zimmerman denied using a slur and law enforcement analyses of the call have been unable to conclude what he said and so defamation can't be proved on that case either, the judge said.

Zimmerman's attorney, James Beasley, was in depositions for another case Monday and didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

NBC News spokeswoman Ali Zelenko said in a statement that the network is "gratified by the court's dismissal of this lawsuit, which we have always believed to be without merit."

Zimmerman still owes his defense attorneys $2.5 million. Any award he could have gotten from the lawsuit was expected to help him pay those bills.

A spokesman for Mark O'Mara, one of Zimmerman's attorneys, didn't have an immediate comment.

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More

Global stock markets struggle to make gains

SEOUL, South Korea — World stock markets were subdued on Monday as investors prepared for a busy week of economic news that will give new clues about the strength of the global recovery.

In Europe, Britain's FTSE closed down 0.2 percent at 6,743.94 and France's CAC 40 shed 0.3 percent to 4,422.84 while Germany's DAX added 0.2 percent to 9,833.07. A report showing inflation in the eurozone remained at a low 0.5 percent failed to shake markets as it is unlikely to affect the European Central Bank's policy decisions at its meeting this week.

Trading was tepid on Wall Street as well, despite data showing pending home sales rose sharply in May. The Dow was down 0.1 percent at 16,843.27 and the S&P 500 was little changed at 1,961.67.

Trading this week is likely to turn on data from China and the U.S. and the ECB meeting. Last week, Asian stock markets were buffeted by weak U.S. consumer spending and sluggish growth in Chinese industrial profits.

A preliminary reading of China's manufacturing activity in June, due Tuesday, will be scrutinized for evidence the slowdown in the world's No. 2 economy has stabilized.

Monthly U.S. employment figures are due Thursday. On the same day, the European Central Bank holds its monthly rate-setting meeting, where it is widely expected to keep its policies unchanged, having taken aggressive steps last month to help the economy.

In Asia, most markets closed higher. Japan's benchmark Nikkei 225 gained 0.4 percent to 15,162.10, reversing morning losses. Japan's economy ministry said the country's industrial output recovered slightly in May from a fall in the previous month.

South Korea's Kospi was up 0.7 percent to 2,002.21 and China's Shanghai Composite Index advanced 0.6 percent to 2,048.33.

Stocks in Taiwan, Thailand and Indonesia also rose. But Australia's S&P/ASX 200 fell 0.9 percent to 5,395.70, one day ahead of the central bank's rate-setting meeting.

Hong Kong's Hang Seng shed 0.1 percent to 23,190.72.

In energy trading, benchmark U.S. crude for August delivery was down 35 cents to $105.39 per barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract fell 10 cents on Friday.

In currencies, the dollar slipped to 101.28 yen from 101.41 yen late Friday. The euro rose to $1.3691 from $1.3648, reversing an earlier drop.

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More

Gas up 2 cents per gallon in Massachusetts

BOSTON — Massachusetts gas prices are the highest they have been approaching the Fourth of July holiday in six years.

AAA Southern New England reports Monday that the price of self-serve regular has risen 2 cents per gallon the past week to an average of $3.70, and is now 6 cents higher than a month ago.

The in-state price is 2 cents more than the national average, and a full quarter higher than the Massachusetts price at the same time last year.

AAA found a range of 32 cents, from a low of $3.57 for a gallon of self-serve regular, to a high of $3.89.

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More

Casino revenues included in $36b state budget

BOSTON — Anti-casino activists are calling on lawmakers not to include about $73 million in casino licensing and slot parlor revenues in the state budget they are set to finalize this week.

Repeal the Casino Deal chairman John Ribeiro, in a statement Monday, said the "phantom" revenue won't exist if voters repeal the casino law in November. The state's high court last week cleared the way for a voter referendum on the state's 2011 casino law, which authorized the licensing of up to three casinos and one slot parlor in the state.

A $36.5 billion House-Senate compromise budget reached over the weekend includes $53 million in casino licensing revenue and $20 million in slot licensing revenues. Lawmakers are due to vote on the budget bill Monday. The fiscal year starts Tuesday.

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More

GOP bucking business priorities on Capitol Hill

WASHINGTON — Traditional ties between the business community and the Republican Party are fraying on Capitol Hill, where the House GOP has bucked corporate interests on a series of priorities this year, from immigration to highway funding to trade.

Rebuffed in Congress, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups have found more success backing pro-business candidates for election, but even they don't always deliver.

It adds up to a significant shift in how the GOP operates, ushered in by the rise of the tea party movement and its distrust of the federal government and of big corporate America. But whether the business community's success this year in electing its favored candidates in primaries can swing the pendulum back its way remains to be seen. There's plentiful evidence that the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups are struggling to get a hearing from congressional conservatives who outright reject their goals and are having outsized influence on House leaders and legislation.

"I think it's the Chamber that's drifted away from conservative pro-business values, not Republicans," said Rep. John Fleming, R-La., a conservative who said that the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups may speak for corporate America, but they don't speak for him. "I think that the Chamber has been moving away from its traditional role and that is to protect small businesses. I don't know why."

This past week the divide played out in the debate over whether to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank, a government agency that makes and guarantees loans to help U.S. exporters sell their products. It's a priority for the business community, but conservatives have seized on it as the latest example of corporate welfare, with conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation urging lawmakers to stand opposed.

It's certainly a minor matter to most voters, and some more establishment-aligned Republicans marveled that it's become an issue at all.

"I never thought in my wildest dreams that the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank could become a defining issue for Republicans," said Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa.

Yet the conservative opposition has been such that the newly elected House majority leader, Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., reversed himself and announced his opposition to the bank, and Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, a supporter in the past and a leading business ally, elected to remain neutral in this go-round.

As with last year's government shutdown, it's an issue where conservative Republicans swatted away the desires of business leaders and their GOP allies, in the process delighting Republican base voters and possibly turning off moderates.

"The Chamber was kind of like the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval, but since 2007, 2008 I think that's changed," said John Feehery, a Republican consultant who worked for former House Speaker Dennis Hastert. "Some people see it as a negative, they see it as being suspect. And that's a sea change really."

It's a shift Republican activists celebrate.

"It seems like K Street has had an upper hand at the GOP table, and I think that's changing with the decentralization of politics that gives activists a bigger voice," said Matt Kibbe, head of FreedomWorks, an advocacy group affiliated with the tea party. "The tension's always been there but I think that in the past when push came to shove the Chamber was more likely to get its way, and that's not necessarily so anymore."

Mainstream congressional Republicans tend to play down the rift, and Chamber officials say their relations remain good with most GOP lawmakers.

"I think the vast majority of congressional Republicans in the House and in the Senate are traditionally and historically, and continue to be, on basically the same page as the small, medium and large business community," said Bruce Josten, executive vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

"Are there some outliers within the conferences and caucuses that have different views?" Josten said. "Of course. There have always been outliers."

Josten disputed the notion that House Republicans' resistance to renewing the Export-Import Bank, overhauling immigration laws, replenishing the highway trust fund, or other issues was emblematic of a deeper trend.

Even so, the Chamber and other like-minded business groups have worked methodically this year to reduce the number of "outliers," spending millions in Republican primaries to elect more mainstream Republicans over their tea party opponents. They have racked up a string of victories, from Senate races in North Carolina and Kentucky to one most recently in Mississippi, where incumbent Thad Cochran narrowly survived a tea party challenge.

But if the candidates they're choosing are better than the alternatives, there's little sign they share the Chamber's priorities on all issues, particularly immigration, where the U.S. Chamber's alliance with labor unions to support an overhaul alienated some conservatives. And the Chamber's electoral involvement carries some risk, including hardening opposition from tea party lawmakers already on Capitol Hill who may not be going anywhere.

"It's hard for me to offer my staff to the U.S. Chamber to have conversations when they are targeting my allies here in Congress," complained Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. "I think it undercuts their ability to have conversations with members of Congress."

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More

Justices: Can't make employers cover contraception

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that some corporations can hold religious objections that allow them to opt out of the new health law requirement that they cover contraceptives for women.

The justices' 5-4 decision is the first time that the high court has ruled that profit-seeking businesses can hold religious views under federal law. And it means the Obama administration must search for a different way of providing free contraception to women who are covered under objecting companies' health insurance plans.

Contraception is among a range of preventive services that must be provided at no extra charge under the health care law that President Barack Obama signed in 2010 and the Supreme Court upheld two years later.

Two years ago, Chief Justice John Roberts cast the pivotal vote that saved the health care law in the midst of Obama's campaign for re-election. On Monday, dealing with a small sliver of the law, Roberts sided with the four justices who would have struck down the law in its entirety.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion. The court's four liberal justices dissented.

The court stressed that its ruling applies only to corporations that are under the control of just a few people in which there is no essential difference between the business and its owners, like the Oklahoma-based Hobby Lobby chain of arts-and-craft stores that challenged the provision.

Alito also said the decision is limited to contraceptives under the health care law. "Our decision should not be understood to hold that an insurance-coverage mandate must necessarily fall if it conflicts with an employer's religious beliefs," Alito said.

He suggested two ways the administration could ensure women get the contraception they want. It could simply pay for pregnancy prevention, he said.

Or it could provide the same kind of accommodation it has made available to religious-oriented, not-for-profit corporations. Those groups can tell the government that providing the coverage violates their religious beliefs. At that point, the groups' insurers or a third-party administrator takes on the responsibility of paying for the birth control.

The accommodation is the subject of separate legal challenges, but the court said Monday that the profit-seeking companies could not assert religious claims in such a situation.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was part of the majority, also wrote separately to emphasize that the administration can solve its problem easily. "The accommodation works by requiring insurance companies to cover, without cost sharing, contraception coverage for female employees who wish it," Kennedy said. He said that arrangement "does not impinge on the plaintiffs' religious beliefs."

Houses of worship and other religious institutions whose primary purpose is to spread the faith are exempt from the requirement to offer birth control.

In a dissent she read aloud from the bench, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called the decision "potentially sweeping" because it minimizes the government's interest in uniform compliance with laws affecting the workplace. "And it discounts the disadvantages religion-based opt outs impose on others, in particular, employees who do not share their employer's religious beliefs," Ginsburg said.

The administration said a victory for the companies would prevent women who work for them from making decisions about birth control based on what's best for their health, not whether they can afford it. The government's supporters pointed to research showing that nearly one-third of women would change their contraceptive if cost were not an issue; a very effective means of birth control, the intrauterine device, can cost up to $1,000.

The contraceptives at issue before the court were the emergency contraceptives Plan B and ella, and two IUDs.

Nearly 50 businesses have sued over covering contraceptives. Some, like those involved in the Supreme Court case, are willing to cover most methods of contraception, as long as they can exclude drugs or devices that the government says may work after an egg has been fertilized. Other companies object to paying for any form of birth control.

There are separate lawsuits challenging the contraception provision from religiously affiliated hospitals, colleges and charities.

A survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation found 85 percent of large American employers already had offered such coverage before the health care law required it.

Most working women will probably see no impact from the ruling, corporate health benefits consultants expect. Publicly traded companies are unlikely to drag religion into their employee benefit plans, said Mark Holloway, director of compliance services at the Lockton Companies, an insurance broker that serves medium-sized and growing employers.

"Most employers view health insurance as a tool to attract and retain employees," said Holloway. "Women employees want access to contraceptive coverage and most employers don't have a problem providing that coverage. It is typically not a high-cost item."

It is unclear how many women potentially are affected by the high court ruling. Hobby Lobby is by far the largest employer of any company that has gone to court to fight the birth control provision.

Oklahoma City-based Hobby Lobby has more than 15,000 full-time employees in more than 600 crafts stores in 41 states. The Greens are evangelical Christians who also own Mardel, a Christian bookstore chain.

The other company is Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. of East Earl, Pa., owned by a Mennonite family and employing 950 people in making wood cabinets.

___

Associated Press writer Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar contributed to this report.

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More

GM won't limit ignition switch crash compensation

WASHINGTON — Kenneth Feinberg is prepared to pay out billions of General Motors' money to victims of crashes in GM small cars — provided they can prove the cars' ignition switches caused the crash.

GM links 13 deaths to a defective ignition switch in cars such as the Chevrolet Cobalt and Saturn Ion. But trial lawyers and lawmakers say claims of wrongful death and injury could total in the hundreds.

Feinberg, one of the country's top compensation experts, said GM has placed no limit on the total amount he can pay to injured people or relatives of those killed. And he alone — not GM — will decide how much they each will get, even though he is being paid by the company and it didn't like some of the program's provisions.

Feinberg wouldn't estimate the ultimate cost for GM, saying he has no idea how many death or injury claims he will get. Based on the methodology he plans to employ, a large amount of claims could mean a sum running into the hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions.

"GM has basically said whatever it costs to pay any eligible claims under the protocol they will pay it. There is no ceiling," Feinberg said at a Monday news conference in Washington to announce details of the plan.

With the plan, GM is trying to limit its legal liabilities, control the damage to its image and eventually move beyond the crisis caused by its failure to correct the ignition switch problem for more than a decade, even as it learned of fatal crashes. The company recalled 2.6 million older small cars earlier this year to replace the switches.

Only those hurt in crashes caused by the small-car ignition switches are eligible, so the program excludes other GM safety problems. People filing claims will have to prove that the switches caused the crashes. Once their claim is settled, they give up their right to sue the company.

Claims can be filed from Aug. 1 to Dec. 31. Once the filing is completed, Feinberg promises payment in 90 to 180 days in most cases. People who previously settled lawsuits with GM are eligible to apply for more compensation.

Feinberg said he will not consider whether those injured in crashes contributed to the cause by drinking alcohol, speeding, not wearing seat belts or other behavior. But GM could use that as a defense if the cases go to trial, he said.

"We have no interest in evaluating any alleged contributory negligence on the part of the driver," he said.

In many cases, cars have been destroyed and it will be difficult to determine if the switches caused the crash, Feinberg said.

"Unlike the 911 fund or the BP oil spill fund, many of these accidents occurred years ago, decades ago," Feinberg said. He urged those seeking compensation to use police, hospital, insurance and auto repair records to buttress their claims. If the accident vehicle is still available, that's even better, he said.

Legal experts say GM has almost no defenses left in crash lawsuits because it conceded the switches are defective and that its employees were negligent in failing to recall the cars. A GM-funded probe by an outside attorney blamed the delays on a dysfunctional corporate culture and misconduct by some employees. The company has dismissed 15 workers in the case.

Feinberg said he also won't consider whether a crash happened before GM left bankruptcy protection in July of 2009. Under its bankruptcy deal, "New GM" — the company that emerged from court protection — is shielded from claims stemming from crashes that happened before the bankruptcy. Those claims go to "Old GM," the remnants of the company left behind in the bankruptcy, which has few assets.

Crashes that occurred after the bankruptcy could get big judgments in court, so it may take more money for Feinberg to settle them. Lawyers are challenging the bankruptcy shield, and if that fails, pre-bankruptcy claimants may have to settle with Feinberg.

The faulty ignition switches can slip from "run" to "accessory," unexpectedly shutting off the engines. That knocks out power steering and brakes and can cause drivers to lose control. In addition, the air bags won't inflate due to lack of power, so they won't protect people in a crash. Feinberg said if the air bags inflated, that negates a claim because that means the crash wasn't caused by the switch.

If air bag inflation is in doubt, the claims still will be considered, Feinberg said.

Drivers, passengers, pedestrians and occupants of cars hit by GM vehicles are eligible for payment, Feinberg said.

Laura Christian, the mother of an accident victim who attended the news conference, said she had evidence that 165 people have died in accidents caused by the ignition switch problem. She also said there is evidence that in some cases the driver succeeded restarting the vehicle moments before the crash, leading to air bag deployment. She asked if Feinberg would consider such cases.

"I will be glad to consider anything you have," Feinberg said.

Feinberg will follow the same methodology he used when he handled a $7 billion government fund for victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. He has detailed formulas setting payments based on a victim's age, earnings potential and severity of injuries.

Those injured can either follow the formula and get a quick payment, or try to justify a bigger payment through "an individual negotiation tied to the extraordinary circumstances of the claim," Feinberg said. Claimants still not satisfied after that can sue GM.

Under Feinberg's formula, for example, relatives of a deceased 25-year-old earning $75,000 per year who is married with two children would get $5.1 million. But the relatives could build a case to get more, he said. Severely injured people could get more money than some death cases, Feinberg said. For example, a 40-year-old earning $70,000 per year who is married with no children and became a paraplegic in a crash would get $6.6 million under the formula.

Feinberg will limit how much he'll pay people with less-serious injuries, based on how long they stayed in the hospital, similar to the way he compensated victims of the Boston Marathon bombings. But there is no cap on potential payments to relatives of those killed and people with catastrophic injuries that caused brain damage, amputation, serious burns or paralysis. In addition, Feinberg said it won't matter whether drivers contributed to their crashes by drinking alcohol, texting or failing to wear seat belts.

"GM has agreed that it cannot challenge my ultimate determination," Feinberg said. "They have no right to appeal."

Those who want to punish GM should go to court rather than filing a claim, Feinberg said. He also said he will consider only injury claims, not those for property damage or loss of a car's value.

With the Sept. 11 fund, the average award to families of those killed was $2.1 million though 2,880 claims. The fund also paid an average of about $400,000 each for the 2,680 accepted claims of injuries stemming from the attacks. The smallest injury award was $500, the largest $8.6 million, according to the report. Only about 80 lawsuits rose from the attacks.

GM said in a statement that Feinberg's plan shows it is taking responsibility for what happened to victims "by treating them with compassion, decency and fairness."

Feinberg acknowledged that some people will question his fairness, given that he was hired by GM.

"The only way you overcome that problem is by demonstrating through the awards that the program is fair," he said. "Money is a pretty poor substitute for loss. It's the limits of what we can do, unfortunately."

____

Krisher and Auto Writer Dee-Ann Durbin reported from Detroit.

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More

Stocks drift in holiday-shortened week

NEW YORK — Stocks flickered between small gains and losses on Monday as investors assessed the latest data on housing. The stock market is set to end June with its seventh straight quarterly gain.

KEEPING SCORE: The Standard & Poor's 500 index rose 0.3 points, or less than 0.1 percent, to 1,961 as of 12:18 p.m. Eastern time. The index has gained 4.7 percent in the second quarter. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 14 points, or 0.1 percent, to 16,837. The Nasdaq composite climbed nine points, or 0.2 percent, to 4,407.

PENDING HOME SALES: The number of Americans who signed contracts to buy homes shot up in May. The National Association of Realtors said Monday that its seasonally adjusted pending home sales index rose 6.1 percent to 103.9 last month. It was the sharpest month-over-month gain since April 2010. The stocks of home builders rose. D.R. Horton gained 71 cents, or 3 percent, to $24.57. Lennar gained 35 cents, or 0.8 percent, to $41.94.

THE BACKDROP: Major stock indexes remain close to all-time highs after advancing in the second quarter amid signs that the U.S. economy is gradually strengthening after a winter slowdown. The long stretch of gains for stocks has left some investors wary.

"We are cautious. We see a little bit of a pullback here because we haven't seen one for quite some time," said Sean Lynch, managing director of global equity and research strategy for Wells Fargo private bank.

A DEAL: Pittsburgh-based PPG Industries announced plans to buy Mexico's Consorcio Comex for $2.3 billion. The maker of paints wants to bolster its business in Mexico and Central America. PPG Industries rose $6.01, or 2.9 percent, to $209.99.

DIABETES: MannKind jumped $1.12, or 11.1 percent, to $11.10 after the Food and Drug Administration on Friday approved Afrezza, a diabetes medication to help patients control their blood sugar levels during meals.

SHORTENED WEEK: The stock market will close at 1 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, ahead of the July 4 holiday. Before that investors will receive reports on manufacturing, construction spending and hiring. The government's monthly jobs report will be released Thursday morning.

BONDS AND COMMODITIES: In the market for government bonds, the yield on the 10-year note fell to 2.52 percent from 2.54 percent on Friday. Bond yields fall when prices rise. The price of crude oil dropped 57 cents, or 0.6 percent, to $105.17.

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More

Stocks drift at start of holiday-shortened week

NEW YORK — Stocks are little changed in midday trading as the market heads for a modest gain for June.

The Dow Jones industrial average lost 15 points, or 0.1 percent, to 16,836 as of noon Eastern Time Monday.

The Standard & Poor's 500 index was flat at 1,961. The Nasdaq composite edged up eight points, or 0.2 percent, to 4,405.

The S&P 500 ended last week with a slight loss but is still up nearly 2 percent in June.

Paint maker PPG Industries rose 3 percent after announcing plans to buy Mexico's Consorcio Comex.

Bond prices rose. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note edged down to 2.52 percent.

U.S. markets will close early on Thursday and remain closed Friday for the July 4th holiday.

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More

Court: Public union can't make nonmembers pay fees

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court dealt a blow to public sector unions Monday, ruling that thousands of home health care workers in Illinois cannot be required to pay fees that help cover a union's costs of collective bargaining.

In a 5-4 split along ideological lines, the justices said the practice violates the First Amendment rights of nonmembers who disagree with the positions that unions take.

The ruling is a setback for labor unions that have bolstered their ranks and their bank accounts in Illinois and other states by signing up hundreds of thousands of in-home care workers. It could lead to an exodus of members who will have little incentive to pay dues if nonmembers don't have to share the burden of union costs.

But the ruling was limited to "partial-public employees" and stopped short of overturning decades of practice that has generally allowed public sector unions of teachers, firefighters and other government workers to pass through their representation costs to nonmembers.

Writing for the court, Justice Samuel Alito said home care workers "are different from full-fledged public employees" because they work primarily for their disabled or elderly customers and do not have most of the rights and benefits of state employees. The ruling does not affect private sector workers.

The case involves about 26,000 Illinois workers who provide home care for disabled people and are paid with Medicaid funds administered by the state. In 2003, the state passed a measure deeming the workers state employees eligible for collective bargaining.

A majority of the workers then selected the Service Employees International Union to negotiate with the state to increase wages, improve health benefits and set up training programs. Those workers who chose not to join the union had to pay proportional "fair share" fees to cover collective bargaining and other administration costs.

A group of workers led by Pamela Harris — a home health aide who cares for her disabled son at home — filed a lawsuit arguing the fees violate the First Amendment. Backed by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, the workers said it wasn't fair to make someone pay fees to a group that takes positions the fee-payer disagrees with.

The workers argue they are not government employees capable of being unionized in the traditional sense. They are different, they say, because they work in people's homes, not on government property, and are not supervised by other state employees. And they say the union is not merely seeking higher wages, but making a political push for expansion of Medicaid payments.

Alito agreed, saying "it is impossible to argue that the level of Medicaid funding (or, for that matter, state spending for employee benefits in general) is not a matter of great public concern."

The workers had urged the justices to go even farther and overturn a 1977 Supreme Court decision which held that public employees who choose not to join a union can still be required to pay representation fees, as long as those fees don't go toward political purposes. About half of the states require these fair-share fees.

Alito said the court was not overturning that case, Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, which is confined "to full-fledged state employees." But he said that extending Abood to include "partial-public employees, quasi-public employees, or simply private employees would invite problems."

Justice Elena Kagan wrote the dissent for the four liberal justices. Kagan said the majority's decision to leave the older case in place is "cause for satisfaction, though hardly applause."

Kagan agreed with the state's arguments that home care workers should be treated the same as other public workers because Illinois sets their salaries, resolves disputes over pay, conducts performance reviews and enforces the terms of employment contracts.

"Our decisions have long afforded government entities broad latitude to manage their workforces, even when that affects speech they could not regulate in other contexts," Kagan said.

Harris issued a statement through the National Right to Work Foundation praising the decision.

"Families in Illinois can relax knowing their homes are safe from being a union workplace and there will be no third party intruding into the care we provide our disabled sons and daughters," Harris said.

Still, the court's limited ruling means public unions avoided a potentially devastating blow that could have meant a major drop in public employee membership ranks.

Mary Kay Henry, president of the SEIU, said her union would work with Illinois officials to create a new model for "working together to create good jobs and improve the quality of care that we deliver to seniors and the disabled."

Henry said it was not clear how the decision would affect home care union models in other states, where the union represents 400,000 caregivers.

A federal district court and the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had rejected the lawsuit, citing the high court's precedent.

At least nine other states have allowed home care workers to join unions: California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.

00.24 | 0 komentar | Read More