The U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled a conference June 18, when it could discuss whether to hold a hearing for a follow-up to the Janus v. American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Council (AFSCME) decision, The Center Square reported.

This case and the follow-up, could determine whether public employees will get back hundreds of millions of dollars in union dues that were taken out of their paychecks without their permission.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and Liberty Justice Center filed their reply briefs May 22.

Former child support specialist Mark Janus won the original Janus case, seeking to get the fees he had paid the AFSCME Council 31. The case had been sent to lower courts for review, but it has returned to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The Supreme Court agreed that the union taking money from non-members was wrong but the union still has the money it illegally garnished from my paycheck,” Janus said in a statement. “It’s time for AFSCME to give me back the money they wrongfully took.”

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has issued an opinion based on the 2018 Janus v. AFSME decision and noted that public employers must get explicit consent from employees each year before deducting union dues from paychecks. Public employees are not required to support a union reported the Texas Business Coalition earlier this month.

 “Public employees cannot be forced to support inherently political organizations like government unions,” Steve Delie, legal counsel and director of Workers for Opportunity, told the Mackinac Center. “We applaud the Texas Attorney General in this clear and correct reading of the Janus case. This policy will provide the proper protection of public employees’ constitutional rights.”

In January, state Rep. Briscoe Cain requested that Paxton clarify whether the state must tell workers of their rights against compelled speech, and to confirm what information meets the legal threshold, and how long those rights remain valid. The Texas Municipal Police Association told Paxton it would be inappropriate to give Cain his opinion.

This is part of the impetus for Paxton’s opinion that direct consent must be obtained before deducting union dues from public employees’ paychecks.