The U.S. Supreme Court case Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association in 1990 revolved around the issue of union dues and their use for political activities not directly related to collective bargaining. The plaintiffs, non-union members who were still required to pay agency fees under Michigan's Public Employment Relations Act, argued that using these funds for lobbying efforts violated their First Amendment rights by forcing them to financially support political speech with which they disagreed. The court ruled that while unions could charge non-members for activities directly related to collective bargaining (including contract negotiation and grievance adjustment), it was unconstitutional for unions to use those same funds on broader social or economic issues unrelated specifically to labor-management disputes within the workplace where the employees worked.

In the dissenting opinion for Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association, Justice Scalia argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and lacked a clear standard. He disagreed with their view on what union activities could be funded by nonmembers' fees, arguing that only collective bargaining costs should be covered. According to him, other expenses like lobbying or public relations campaigns were not directly related to negotiating employment terms and thus shouldn't be chargeable to nonmembers without their consent. Furthermore, he criticized the majority's distinction between local and national union expenditures as arbitrary since both levels work together in representing employees' interests. Lastly, he expressed concern about potential First Amendment violations due to forcing individuals to financially support political speech they disagree with.