Freedom Foundation v. Rayfield et al

  1. March 17, 2026

    Freedom Foundation Takes Ore. Union Suit To 9th Circ.

    The Freedom Foundation is appealing to the Ninth Circuit the dismissal of its lawsuit that challenges an Oregon law allowing unions to sue anyone who impersonates union representatives, the conservative think tank announced Tuesday.

  2. March 16, 2026

    Group Loses Fight Against Ore. Ban On Union Impersonation

    The Freedom Foundation has lost its challenge to an Oregon law that lets unions sue people who impersonate union organizers, with an Oregon federal judge saying the libertarian think tank lacks standing to sue.

  3. February 17, 2026

    Union Foe Can't Fight Ore. Impostor Ban, Court Told

    Accepting a conservative think tank's challenge to an Oregon law that threatens fines for impersonating public-sector unions would clash with decades of precedent on the state's exposure to enforcement challenges, a union attorney said Tuesday in arguments on its bid to toss the suit.

  4. February 04, 2026

    Unions Urge Court to Toss Think Tank's Union Law Challenge

    A group of public sector unions asked an Oregon federal court Wednesday to toss a free market think tank's suit challenging a state law that allows unions to sue anyone who impersonates union representatives, arguing that the foundation's claims against the unions fail because the unions aren't state actors.

  5. January 29, 2026

    Ore. Seeks Quick Exit In Think Tank's Union Law Challenge

    ​​The state of Oregon has urged a federal judge to toss a free market think tank's lawsuit challenging a state law that allows unions to sue anyone who impersonates union representatives, arguing the claims are barred by the 11th Amendment.

  6. January 02, 2026

    Think Tank Sues Oregon Over Union Impersonation Law

    A free market think tank is challenging an Oregon law that allows unions to sue anyone that falsely impersonates union representatives, according to a new lawsuit filed in Oregon federal court, arguing that the new law suppresses their speech amid an "ongoing and constitutionally necessary debate" over union dues.