The First Amendment protects Americans’ freedom of speech. The government cannot prevent someone from speaking. But equally important is the fact that the government cannot force someone to say anything against their will.

When the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty learned about Milwaukee Public Schools’ (MPS) “union leave” program, they knew that not only was it an irresponsible policy—it violated Wisconsin taxpayers’ freedom of speech.

So they decided to do something about it.

WILL challenges unconstitutional union leave policy

MPS’ union leave policy permitted certain union-member MPS employees to use at least ten (taxpayer) paid days per year to engage in “union-related activities.” However, nowhere in the policy did MPS define what “union-related activities” could entail. Also, there was no mechanism for the district to oversee what district employees were actually doing during paid union leave time. This meant that the district’s vague policy amounted to taxpayers subsidizing the speech and activities of public employee labor unions—which (as laid out in the landmark Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court case) equates to unconstitutional compelled speech. The MPS policy also violated the Wisconsin Constitution’s requirement that all state spending be for a public purpose and not for the benefit of a private entity, like a labor union.

WILL Deputy Counsel, Lucas Vebber, explains that, “Under the MPS union leave policy, Milwaukee taxpayers foot the bill to pay employees not for the public school jobs they were hired for, but rather to engage in union-related activities. This violates Constitutional safeguards against compelled speech and the requirement that public spending be for a public purpose.”

WILL didn’t waste any time laying the groundwork to challenge the union leave policy. To raise awareness on the issue, WILL’s team began discussing the policy and its problems with school district taxpayers. As a result of these conversations, they met one taxpayer, Daniel Sebring, who was willing to stand up and fight the school district’s abuse of his tax dollars.

WILL represented Sebring free of charge and together they launched the challenge to the union leave policy.

Wisconsin law makes it incredibly complex to file lawsuits against local governments, so WILL had to jump through multiple initial procedural hoops in their challenge. First, WILL sent a letter to the school district notifying them that WILL believed their union leave policy was illegal under the Wisconsin Constitution. WILL then demanded that the district take action to fix the policy immediately. MPS didn’t respond to WILL’s demand letter, so WILL filed a lawsuit in Milwaukee County Circuit Court.

After WILL filed their lawsuit, MPS tried a variety of procedural moves to fight the lawsuit like trying to move the suit from state court to federal court. WILL successfully fended off the district’s actions and the federal court remanded the case back to state court. Then, after it was clear that the district would have to defend their policy in court, the Milwaukee School Board convened a meeting to address the union leave policy. The Milwaukee School Board significantly amended the policy to make clear that “permissible union-related activities for which release time may be offered only include activities that are politically and ideologically ‘viewpoint neutral.’” Also, the School Board specified that any union leave activities “must also relate to the functions of the District.”

As a result of the district amending their policy, WILL’s lawsuit was dismissed.

An important victory for taxpayers

WILL’s victory means that taxpayer dollars can no longer be abused by an unconstitutional union leave policy. Now, union leave is limited exclusively to activities that are politically and ideologically viewpoint neutral and must also relate to the functions of the school district.

But the impacts of WILL’s victory go beyond just Milwaukee.

As a result of this lawsuit, government employers around Wisconsin have been put on notice that WILL and liberty-minded taxpayers are willing to stand up to unlawful giveaways of tax dollars to labor unions. WILL’s victory not only raised awareness of Janus, it also helped apply the principles from Janus to other real-world situations.

Additionally, this win is a great example of how state think tanks can leverage and build upon each other’s victories. WILL was able to bring this case because the Goldwater Institute had done so much significant work to raise awareness on this issue nationally. After reviewing Goldwater’s work, WILL found out about MPS’s unconstitutional union leave policy in their own back yard. And now, WILL’s victory shows other liberty advocates how to successfully protect taxpayers’ freedom of speech while increasing transparency and oversight of taxpayer dollars.