Keller v. State Bar of California
Citation
496 U.S. 1 (1990). Supreme Court of the United States.
Facts
California required all attorneys in the state to join the State Bar and pay annual dues. The Bar used a portion of those dues to finance political and ideological activities — including lobbying on legislation — that some members found objectionable. Members sued, arguing that compelled subsidization of ideological speech violated their First Amendment rights.
Issue
May a mandatory state bar association use compulsory member dues to fund political and ideological activities unrelated to the core purposes of regulating the legal profession?
Holding
The Court held unanimously that an integrated bar may not use compulsory dues to finance political or ideological activities to which members object. The First Amendment limits the bar’s use of mandatory dues to activities germane to regulating the legal profession and improving the quality of legal services.
Rule / Doctrine
Drawing on Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (union dues), the Court held that compelled subsidization of political speech violates the First Amendment unless the activity is germane to the organization’s core purposes. For a state bar, permissible activities include regulating the legal profession and improving legal services; impermissible activities include political lobbying and ideological advocacy unrelated to professional regulation. Members have a right to a rebate or reduction for the non-germane portion.
Significance
Keller defines the permissible scope of mandatory bar activities and remains the leading case on bar association First Amendment limits. It has influenced subsequent litigation about mandatory bar dues and the scope of bar association advocacy.