Eight years have passed since the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Janus v. AFSCME struck down mandatory union dues for public employees, a ruling that the majority argued violated the First Amendment by forcing workers to fund political speech they might oppose. The impact has been significant: as of 2023, up to 1.2 million public workers have canceled or declined union membership that would have been compulsory before the ruling, slashing union revenue by roughly $720 million annually.
Union membership has taken a hit across major labor organizations. Between 2017 and 2022, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) saw its active dues-paying membership drop from about 1.26 million to 1.05 million—a loss of over 200,000, or 16 percent. The Service Employees International Union and the National Education Association (NEA) experienced similar double-digit declines. The NEA’s inflation-adjusted headquarters dues revenue fell from $370 million in fiscal 2017 to $310 million five years later, a real-terms drop of about 16 percent. Nationally, public-sector union density slipped from 33.9 percent in 2018 to 32.2 percent in 2024, before inching back up to 32.9 percent last year, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.
The effect is even more pronounced in states that gave workers greater control over dues. After Florida ended government payroll deduction of union dues in 2023, the Florida Education Association lost more than 20,000 members in a single school year. When workers must actively choose to pay rather than having dues automatically deducted, a meaningful number opt out.
“The real story of the Janus era is not collapse, but choice,” said Aaron Withe, CEO of the Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit that informs public employees of their rights. “Once workers had a real choice, hundreds of thousands took it and quit their unions.”
But unions have not accepted this quietly. They have lobbied in at least 14 states for greater access to employees’ personal contact information, and pushed legislation that makes it harder to leave than to join. Washington’s HB 1575, for example, allows unions to sign workers up for dues deduction via writing, email, or recorded phone call, but permits cancellation only in writing. More troubling, Withe argues, are laws designed to silence outside organizations that inform workers about their options.
Oregon led the way with a law effective January that imposes civil penalties of up to $6,250 per communication against any group accused of “impersonating” a labor organization. The Freedom Foundation is challenging that law in federal court. New York is poised to follow, with legislation giving Attorney General Letitia James the power to fine organizations $1,000 per communication under similarly vague language, now awaiting Governor Kathy Hochul’s signature. In New York alone, about 7,500 public employees have used the Freedom Foundation’s materials to cancel union membership—the very activity the new law targets. Similar legislation was considered in Hawaii this year.
Withe warns these laws are not consumer protections but prior restraints on free speech. “They define worker outreach broadly enough that any communication about Janus rights could trigger legal action and crippling fines,” he said. A survey found that 52 percent of teachers did not know they could leave their union without paying a fee—an information gap unions have little incentive to correct.
The broader vision of a post-Janus world, Withe argues, is one where unions must earn membership annually and compete for dues by serving workers, rather than relying on revenue from those who never chose representation. “That is not a threat to organized labor,” he said. “It is a standard every other institution in American life already has to meet. Workers deserve the same accountability from the organizations that claim to represent them. The First Amendment made that possible eight years ago.”
For context, America's broken institutions have long fueled public despair, and the Janus ruling represents a rare check on union power. Meanwhile, recent court blocks on Trump's curbs show the ongoing legal battles over worker rights. And as bipartisan talks collapse, the political landscape remains volatile for labor and policy alike.
