U.S. Supreme Court

Case Status


Docket Number


Cert. Denied


Questions Presented

Did the Ninth Circuit err by holding that California’s M&RB laws are not preempted under the FAAAA, applying a preemption test that conflicts with the decisions of this Court and other circuits and has consistently produced flawed results?

Case Updates

Cert. petition denied

May 04, 2015

U.S. Chamber urges Supreme Court to review Ninth Circuit ruling regarding FAAAA

February 09, 2015

In its brief, the U.S. Chamber urged the U.S. Supreme Court to grant a certiorari petition to clarify whether the FAAAA, which deregulated the motor carrier industry, preempts enforcement of California’s meal and rest break laws as applied to motor carriers. The Chamber's brief argued that the Ninth Circuit erred when it constructed a novel test limiting the scope of FAAAA preemption to laws that “bind” an air carrier to a particular price, route, or service. The Chamber explained that this cramped reading of the preemption provision is incompatible with the text and intent of the FAAAA and Supreme Court precedent interpreting the FAAAA, and is in tension with the approach applied by the First Circuit and other federal courts.

Paul DeCamp and Collin O'Connor Udell of Jackson Lewis P.C. represented the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as counsel to the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center in this case.

Case Documents