Page 154 - 2022augustBOG
P. 154

Case 2:19-cv-11962-LMA-JVM   Document 106   Filed 08/08/22   Page 27 of 33





               notice, the  Fifth Circuit  noted that  the Texas  Bar’s procedures were insufficient,


               insofar as they “place[d] the onus on objecting attorneys to parse the Bar’s proposed

               budget—which only details expenses at the line-item level, often without significant


               explanation—to determine which activities might be objectionable.” Id. Additionally,


               the Bar did not provide members with “any breakdown of where their fees go.” Id.

               The Court concluded that this approach was “a far cry from a Hudson notice, which


               estimates the  breakdown between chargeable and non-chargeable activities and

               explains how those  amounts were determined.”  Id.  (citing  Hudson, 475 U.S. at


               307 & n.18).


                       When  considering whether the LSBA’s procedures comply with  Hudson,  as

               explained in Boudreaux and McDonald, the Court notes its confusion at the outset.


               It is difficult to reconcile the Fifth Circuit’s adoption of Hudson procedures with its


               holding in McDonald as to freedom of association. After all, Hudson, as it arose in the

               context of public-sector labor unions,  and as it has been approvingly referenced or
                                                         83

               adopted in the context of bar associations,  is premised on the notion that  such

               organizations can intentionally and affirmatively engage in non-germane activities,


               so long as they provide sufficient procedural protections for individuals who wish to






               83  Hudson arose “in the context of a union that affirmatively planned to engage in
               activities unrelated  to collective bargaining for which it could only charge  its
               members.”  Crowe v.  Oregon State Bar, 989  F.3d  714, 726 (9th Cir. 2021) (citing
               Hudson, 475 U.S. at 298). While nonmembers could be compelled to finance collective
               bargaining, they could not be compelled to finance, for instance, the union’s political
               activities. Accordingly, Hudson required unions “to provide a detailed statement of
               fees in advance so that nonmembers could object before  being charged for
               impermissible activities.” Id. (citing Hudson, 475 U.S. at 305–07).


                                                             27
   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159