how do you feel about right to work, nick?

I don't think it's the government's place to interfere in that regard. If management and the union think it's in their best interest to collectively bargain exempted people, then I have no problem with that.

but what about when you're dealing with units of government and unions?

I don't see a meaningful difference. If the unit of government has the leverage to get the union to concede to a right to work provision, then more power to them. If they don't, then tough shit.

My point is, with a lot of closed-shop workplaces, you're dealing with a public union. In which case, government has every right to restrict union requirements as a condition of employment.

How is that "every right" on the government's side established?

legislation

Has there been any talk about Trump's list of super rightwing wackos?

It's fairly uncommon for anyone to announce who they may or may not pick for Supreme Court Justice, isn't it?

I don't think Trump would care too much about far right supreme court nominees unless it would get him more votes. He's far from an ideologue. Just a common populist.

Justice Clarence Thomas, a reliable conservative vote on the Supreme Court, is mulling retirement after the presidential election, according to court watchers.

Thomas, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush and approved by the Senate after a bitter confirmation, has been considering retirement for a while and never planned to stay until he died, they said. He likes to spend summers in his RV with his wife.

His retirement would have a substantial impact on control of the court. The next president is expected to immediately replace the seat opened by the death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, providing a one-vote edge in the court that is currently divided 4-4.

Should Thomas leave, that slight majority would continue if Donald Trump becomes president. If it's Hillary Clinton, then she would get the chance to flip two Republican seats, giving the liberals a 6-3 majority.

The Court today holds that the discovery of a warrant for an unpaid parking ticket will forgive a police officer’s violation of your Fourth Amendment rights. Do not be soothed by the opinion’s technical language: This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic war­rants—even if you are doing nothing wrong. If the officer discovers a warrant for a fine you forgot to pay, courts will now excuse his illegal stop and will admit into evidence anything he happens to find by searching you after arresting you on the warrant. Because the Fourth Amendment should prohibit, not permit, such misconduct, I dissent.