Page 524 - 2024 Orientation Manual

that there must be procedures in place whereby dissenting members can seek a

remedy for the bar’s noncompliance.

IV. LIFE AFTER KELLER

Aside from holding that an objecting bar member’s mandatory dues may not

be used for political or ideological purposes, the Supreme Court left it to the lower

courts to determine what specific uses are permissible (chargeable) and what uses

are impermissible (nonchargeable).

A. Permissible Activities

Schenieder v. Colegio de Abogados de Puerto Rico 28 , decided in 1990,

offers the most specific guidance on bar activities which may and may not be

funded with mandatory dues. The United States Court of Appeals for the First

Circuit concluded that activities "incidental to the operation of a bar association --

such as social events and the provision of insurance to members -- may be financed

with mandatory fees." 29 Additionally, "[p]olitical activities, including lobbying,

may be funded from compulsory dues so long as the target issues are narrowly

limited to regulating the legal profession or improving the quality of legal

service." 30 The court gave examples of appropriate funding such as lobbying in

favor of budget appropriations for new judicial positions or increased salaries for

government attorneys, or lobbying against statutory limitations on attorney

advertising, or lobbying for the certification of legal specialists. 31
The First Circuit also approved a list of activities sanctioned by the district

court. These included:

28 917 F.2d 620 (1st Cir. 1990).
29 Id. at 632.
30 Id.
31 See Id.

Page 9 of 15