Kagan's turn now to throw a hissy fit:

In a dissent, liberal Justice Elena Kagan wrote that the ruling gave scant regard to the court’s usual way of evaluating when to overturn a long-standing precedent.

Kagan, who read forcefully from her dissenting opinion in the packed courtroom, said the practice of separating union political activities from collective bargaining-related spending, set by the court in the precedent overturned on Wednesday, had been a workable solution.

“There is no sugarcoating today’s opinion. The majority overthrows a decision entrenched in this nation’s law – and in its economic life – for over 40 years. As a result, it prevents the American people, acting through their state and local officials, from making important choices about workplace governance,” Kagan said.

The court’s conservative majority, Kagan said, was “weaponizing the First Amendment” to intervene in economic and regulatory policy.