People gather outside the Supreme Court during oral arguments in the U.S. v. Micosoft case February 27, 2018 in Washington, DC.
Drew Angerer/Getty Images
People gather outside the Supreme Court during oral arguments in the U.S. v. Micosoft case February 27, 2018 in Washington, DC.
Now playing
01:53
Supreme Court deals blow to organized labor
 Front row from left, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, and Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, back row from left, Associate Justice Elena Kagan, Associate Justice Samuel Alito Jr., Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch pose for a group portrait in the East Conference Room of the Supreme Court June 1, 2017 in Washington, DC.
Alex Wong/Getty Images
Front row from left, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, and Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, back row from left, Associate Justice Elena Kagan, Associate Justice Samuel Alito Jr., Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch pose for a group portrait in the East Conference Room of the Supreme Court June 1, 2017 in Washington, DC.
Now playing
01:45
Just how old are the Supreme Court justices?
CNN
Now playing
01:44
LGBT advocate: Devastated not strong enough word
WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 23: People wait in line to enter the U.S. Supreme Court, on April 23, 2018 in Washington, DC. Today the high court is hearing arguments in Chavez-Mesa v. US, which concerns a technical matter regarding sentencing guidelines. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein will be representing the government. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Mark Wilson/Getty Images
WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 23: People wait in line to enter the U.S. Supreme Court, on April 23, 2018 in Washington, DC. Today the high court is hearing arguments in Chavez-Mesa v. US, which concerns a technical matter regarding sentencing guidelines. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein will be representing the government. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Now playing
01:48
Supreme Court upholds Trump's travel ban
Justices of the US Supreme Court sit for their official group photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on June 1, 2017. 
Seated (L-R): Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Anthony M. Kennedy, Chief Justice of the US John G. Roberts, Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer. Standing (L-R): Associate Justices Elena Kagan, Samuel Alito Jr., Sonia Sotomayor and Neil Gorsuch. / AFP PHOTO / SAUL LOEB        (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)
SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images
Justices of the US Supreme Court sit for their official group photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on June 1, 2017. Seated (L-R): Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Anthony M. Kennedy, Chief Justice of the US John G. Roberts, Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer. Standing (L-R): Associate Justices Elena Kagan, Samuel Alito Jr., Sonia Sotomayor and Neil Gorsuch. / AFP PHOTO / SAUL LOEB (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)
Now playing
01:16
How are Supreme Court justices chosen?
WASHINGTON - MARCH 08:  U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy testifies before the House Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee on Capitol Hill March 8, 2007 in Washington, DC. Thomas and fellow Justice Clarence Thomas spoke about concerns with the ongoing remodeling of the court building, the reduction of paperwork due to electronic media and the disparity of pay between federal judges and lawyers working in the private sector.  (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
WASHINGTON - MARCH 08: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy testifies before the House Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee on Capitol Hill March 8, 2007 in Washington, DC. Thomas and fellow Justice Clarence Thomas spoke about concerns with the ongoing remodeling of the court building, the reduction of paperwork due to electronic media and the disparity of pay between federal judges and lawyers working in the private sector. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Now playing
00:58
Justice Kennedy harshly critiques Trump
FILE - In this Oct. 10, 2017, file photo, the Supreme Court in Washington is seen at sunset. The Supreme Court is ordering Washington courts to take a new look at the case of a florist who refused to provide services for the wedding of two men because of her religious objection to same-sex marriage.  The justices' order Monday means the court is passing for now on the chance to decide whether business owners can refuse on religious grounds to comply with anti-discrimination laws that protect LGBT people.(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
FILE - In this Oct. 10, 2017, file photo, the Supreme Court in Washington is seen at sunset. The Supreme Court is ordering Washington courts to take a new look at the case of a florist who refused to provide services for the wedding of two men because of her religious objection to same-sex marriage. The justices' order Monday means the court is passing for now on the chance to decide whether business owners can refuse on religious grounds to comply with anti-discrimination laws that protect LGBT people.(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
Now playing
01:52
SCOTUS sides with faith-based pregnancy centers
WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 12: Members of the Supreme Court, (L-R) Chief Justice John Roberts and associate justices Anthony Kennendy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, applaud as U.S. President Barack Obama arrives to deliver his State of the Union speech before a joint session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol February 12, 2013 in Washington, DC. Facing a divided Congress, Obama focused his speech on new initiatives designed to stimulate the U.S. economy and said, 'It?s not a bigger government we need, but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broad-based growth'. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images North America/Getty Images
WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 12: Members of the Supreme Court, (L-R) Chief Justice John Roberts and associate justices Anthony Kennendy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, applaud as U.S. President Barack Obama arrives to deliver his State of the Union speech before a joint session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol February 12, 2013 in Washington, DC. Facing a divided Congress, Obama focused his speech on new initiatives designed to stimulate the U.S. economy and said, 'It?s not a bigger government we need, but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broad-based growth'. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Now playing
01:21
A look at the current Supreme Court
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy testifies before the House Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee on Capitol Hill March 8, 2007 in Washington, DC. Kennedy and Justice Clarence Thomas spoke about concerns with the ongoing remodeling of the court building, the reduction of paperwork due to electronic media and the disparity of pay between federal judges and lawyers working in the private sector.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy testifies before the House Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee on Capitol Hill March 8, 2007 in Washington, DC. Kennedy and Justice Clarence Thomas spoke about concerns with the ongoing remodeling of the court building, the reduction of paperwork due to electronic media and the disparity of pay between federal judges and lawyers working in the private sector.
Now playing
01:17
Anthony Kennedy: The swing vote
WASHINGTON - JUNE 25: The exterior view of the U.S. Supreme Court is seen June 25, 2007 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court has ruled to give more freedom for interest groups and unions to run TV ads before elections, and also ruled to limit taxpayers' rights to challenge government initiatives as unconstitutionally promoting religion. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
File/Alex Wong/Getty Images
WASHINGTON - JUNE 25: The exterior view of the U.S. Supreme Court is seen June 25, 2007 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court has ruled to give more freedom for interest groups and unions to run TV ads before elections, and also ruled to limit taxpayers' rights to challenge government initiatives as unconstitutionally promoting religion. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Now playing
02:20
Contentious past SCOTUS confirmation hearings
Now playing
04:04
Listen as lawyers argue travel ban case
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, celebrating her 20th anniversary on the bench, is photographed in the West conference room at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Friday, August 30, 2013. (Photo by Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
The Washington Post/The Washington Post/Getty Images
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, celebrating her 20th anniversary on the bench, is photographed in the West conference room at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Friday, August 30, 2013. (Photo by Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
Now playing
01:23
R.B.G. loved being 'notorious'
Will Mullery/CNN
Now playing
02:39
Listen to SCOTUS take up gerrymandering
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg participates in an annual Women's History Month reception hosted by Pelosi in the U.S. capitol building on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.  This year's event honored the women Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court: Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.
Allison Shelley/Getty Images
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg participates in an annual Women's History Month reception hosted by Pelosi in the U.S. capitol building on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. This year's event honored the women Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court: Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.
Now playing
00:42
Ginsburg: For so long, women were silent
Now playing
03:11
Hear Supreme Court arguments about cakeshop
Washington CNN —  

The Supreme Court dealt a major blow to public sector unions on Wednesday in a case that could shake their financial structure and undermine their future stability.

The justices struck down an Illinois law that required non-union workers to pay fees that go to collective bargaining and overturned a 1977 law that required employees to pay so-called “fair share” fees.

The ruling was 5-4 along familiar ideological lines, with conservative Justice Samuel Alito writing for the majority in a case that highlights how the blocking of President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee has dramatically changed the legal and political landscape.

“It is hard to estimate how many billions of dollars have been taken from nonmembers and transferred to public-sector unions in violation of the First Amendment. Those unconstitutional exactions cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely,” Alito wrote.

In a blistering dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wrote, “The First Amendment was meant for better things. It was meant not to undermine but to protect democratic governance – including over the role of public-sector unions.”

Reading from the bench, a move justice only does when he or she thinks a ruling is egregiously wrong, Kagan added: “There’s no sugarcoating today’s opinion.”

The ruling is another key example where the Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell’s move to block Judge Merrick Garland in 2016 after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia has paid dividends for conservatives. President Donald Trump nominated Justice Neil Gorsuch, who has helped cement the conservative bloc on the court.

“It’s the 14th different decision this term in which the conservatives banded together to produce a 5-4 majority, in all of which there’s good reason to doubt whether a Justice appointed by a Democratic President would have voted the same way,” said Steve Vladeck, a CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

This case could also significantly hurt Democrats, Vladeck said.

“This decision in particular will likely have ramifications at the ballot box,” Vladeck said, “since it will weaken the economic health – and political power – of public-sector unions, which tend to support Democratic candidates more often than Republicans.”

Wednesday is the second time in recent weeks where a 5-4 court has infuriated advocates for workers’ rights. The court ruled in May that employers could require employees to sign class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements that bar them from banding together to fight legal disputes.

Overturns 1977 ruling

At the center of the debate is a 1977 Supreme Court opinion known as Abood v. Detroit Board of Education that says while non-members of public sector unions cannot be required to pay fees for a union’s political activities, they can be required to pay so-called “fair share” fees pertaining to issues such as employee grievances, physical safety and training.

In recent years, so-called Right to Work groups as well as some conservatives on the court have pushed for it to be overturned. Wednesday, nearly half of all states have laws on the books that allow broad fair share fees for public employees.

The case was brought by Mark Janus, an Illinois public sector employee, who challenged the fees. He said that because he is a government employee, issues germane to collective bargaining are inherently political. He argued that the First Amendment protected him from having to support such political expression.

Janus has been represented in the challenge by groups such as the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and the Liberty Justice Center.

The Trump administration sided with Janus in the case, reversing course from the Obama administration in a 2016 case when the court heard arguments in a similar challenge, but deadlocked in a 4-4 split following Scalia’s death.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, which represents public sector employees, described the challenge as a threat to American workers.

Union funding at risk

The public sector unions argue that they are required by law to represent all employees regardless of if they are members and that no one is required to join the union.

If non-members don’t have any obligation to pay fair share fees for the collective bargaining obligations, they would become free riders, benefiting from the representation without sharing the costs, the unions say. The coffers of public sector unions would also suffer if non-members were able to get services for free.

Alito noted, and dismissed, the impact to union funds.

“We recognize that the loss of payments from non-members may cause unions to experience unpleasant transition costs in the short term, and may require unions to make adjustments in order to attract and retain members,” Alito wrote.

“But we must weigh these disadvantages against the considerable windfall that unions have received under Abood for the past 41 years,” he added.

Kagan argued that the majority’s decision was poorly reasoned.

“The majority has overruled Abood for no exceptional or special reason, but because it never liked the decision,” she said. “It has overruled Abood because it wanted to.”

The comment seemed to be directed particularly at Chief Justice John Roberts, who often says he does not like to overturn precedent.

“Rarely if ever has the Court overruled a decision – let alone of this import – with so little regard for the usual principles of stare decisis,” she wrote.

She also highlighted the practical impact of Wednesday’s decision.

“State and local governments that thought agency fees furthered their interests will need to find new ways of managing their workforces,” Kagan wrote. “Across the country, the relationships of public employees and employers will alter in both predictable and whole unexpected ways.”

A ‘historic day’

Janus reacted to the ruling by calling it a “historic day.”

“We now have 5 million public sector union members or non-union members that can make their own choices as to whether they want to be a part of that union,” he said.

The Justice Department said on Wednesday it was “pleased” with the court’s decision.

“We are pleased with today’s decision. Public employees should not be forced to pay into a union against their will and support a political message with which they may disagree,” department spokesperson Kerri Kupec said in a statement.

In a statement reacting to the ruling, Paul Shearon of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers said that the case “was based on a bogus free speech argument” and that in the short run, the decision “may hurt some unions financially.”

But, he said, “in the long run it will serve to make unions and their members more militant and force a stronger culture of internal organizing.”