Amicus Brief in Crowe v. Oregon State Bar Argues for First Amendment Protections Against Compelled Association
Olympia, WA — The Freedom Foundation has filed an amicus curiae brief with the United States Supreme Court in Crowe v. Oregon State Bar (No. 24-1025), urging the Court to grant certiorari and strike down mandatory bar association membership as a violation of the First Amendment.
The case challenges the constitutionality of compelled membership in a state bar that engages in political and ideological activities not germane to the regulation of the legal profession. The Petitioners argue that such compelled association infringes on their rights to free speech and free association. The Ninth Circuit upheld Oregon’s bar system, while requiring the Bar to at least create a disclaimer when it speaks on topics that are not germane to its role in regulating the legal profession. But the Freedom Foundation’s brief contends the court failed to adequately apply key precedents, particularly Janus v. AFSCME.
“Just as the Supreme Court recognized in Janus that public-sector workers cannot be forced to financially support a union with which they disagree, the same principle should apply to attorneys compelled to join state bar associations,” said Timothy R. Snowball, Litigation Counsel for the Freedom Foundation. “When it comes to entities like unions and bar associations, the act of membership sends a message — and that message may be at odds with an individual’s beliefs or conscience.”
Background:
The brief highlights a striking parallel: public school teachers in California, including Jewish educators, are forced into legal representation by unions that promote antisemitic rhetoric and support political causes antithetical to their religious identities. While Janus freed public employees from paying union dues, many states still have mandatory bargaining units for public employees with a specific union as the exclusive representative of that unit. Even when dues are not required, the law mandates their inclusion in bargaining units that speak for them — mirroring the dilemma faced by attorneys in Oregon and other mandatory bar states.
The Freedom Foundation’s brief argues the Court should revisit Keller v. State Bar of California (1990), which courts have relied upon in upholding mandatory bar membership. It proposes that voluntary associations, like those in New York and Virginia, can effectively serve the legal profession without infringing on constitutional rights. The brief also emphasizes that direct government oversight — not compelled private association — is the appropriate method for regulating the legal field.
With legal scholars, bar members, and constitutional advocates closely watching, Crowe presents a pivotal opportunity for the Court to clarify the scope of First Amendment protections in the professional licensing context.
The Freedom Foundation, a national nonprofit dedicated to protecting worker rights and promoting government accountability, is leading the charge to restore transparency and choice for public employees. For more information or to schedule an interview with a representative of the Freedom Foundation, contact: abrown@freedomfoundation.com.
