09-4080 Kingstad v. State Bar of Wisconsin

Listen to this article

Constitutional Law
Freedom of speech; mandatory bar associations

The Wisconsin State Bar’s Public Image Campaign did not violate the free speech rights of its members.
“The Ninth Circuit’s generous approach to germaneness in Gardner is consistent with the portion of Thiel that remains binding, where we found that all of the particular activities at issue were germane to the purpose of the State Bar and could be funded with mandatory dues. The disputed activities in Thiel included publishing and distributing a Bill of Rights pamphlet for pre-college students, conducting an ‘Economics of Practice’ survey designed to help lawyers address business decisions related to the practice of law, funding awards given to reporters for writing on law-related topics, sponsoring a group to assist alcoholic lawyers, local bar grants, and sponsoring a mock trial competition. Thiel, 94 F.3d at 405. Although we have overruled the alternative holding in Thiel, its unanimous assessment of the actual germaneness of these activities remains sound. There is no meaningful difference between the public image campaign at issue here and several of those expenditures we approved in Thiel. We do not believe the reasonableness test requires federal courts to engage in closer parsing of the State Bar’s expenditures. In light of Gardner and Thiel, we conclude that the State Bar’s public image campaign was germane to the Bar’s constitutionally legitimate purpose of improving the quality of legal services available to the Wisconsin public.”

Affirmed.

09-4080 Kingstad v. State Bar of Wisconsin

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, Crocker, Mag. J., Hamilton, J.

Full Text