During National Right to Work Legal Foundation attorney Messenger’s time before the bench, he argued that dissenting, non-union member should not be compelled under the First Amendment to pay dues to the union for representation.  When respondents’ attorney Paul Smith argued before the bench, Justice Kennedy raised Messenger’s argument, asking Smith to justify “tak[ing] money from an employee who fundamentally objects to the union’s position,” particularly in “an era where government is getting bigger and bigger.”  Smith countered, urging the Court to consider the balance of the interests when the purpose of State partnership with a union is to “do a better job delivering services” to a “vulnerable population” and save the state money, as well.