[EL] Serious Question About Knox v. SEIU

[Samuel Bagenstos]

Yesterday's decision in Knox v. SEIU, and particularly the broad dicta in the majority opinion, lead me to ask the following question:  If I live in a state where (a) state law requires me to buy liability insurance as a condition of registering a car, and (b) some or all of the auto insurance companies in my state spend money to advocate for or against ballot propositions regarding insurance regulation, am I constitutionally entitled to a rebate of the portion of my premium that went to such expenditures?  Is the insurance company required to make a Hudson-style disclosure of its political and ideological expenditures so I can opt out?

There could be an easy or obvious answer to this question, but I am interested in others' thoughts.

Samuel R. Bagenstos
Professor of Law
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State St.
Ann Arbor, MI  48109
sambagen at umich.edu
http://web.law.umich.edu/_FacultyBioPage/facultybiopagenew.asp?ID=411
http://disabilitylaw.blogspot.com/
Twitter: @sbagen





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120622/0660a361/attachment.html>