Gerald Arendt v. Hilda Solis

MEMORANDUM

Gerald C. Arendt and David D. Brown (collectively, “Arendt”) appeal from the district court’s dismissal of their as-applied challenge to the constitutionality of section 202(e)(8)(A) of the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (“PPA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1085 (e)(8)(A). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we vacate and remand because Arendt lacks Article III standing.

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461 , generally prohibits pension plan amendments that reduce certain accrued pension benefits, including early retirement benefits under the “anti-cutback” rule. 29 U.S.C. § 1054 (g); Cent. Laborers’ Pension Fund v. Heinz, 541 U.S. 739, 741 , 124 S.Ct. 2230 , 159 L.Ed.2d 46 (2004). The PPA, which amended ERISA, contains certain exceptions to this rule. Underfunded plans in “critical status” as defined by the PPA, 29 U.S.C. § 1085 (b)(2), are required, among other things, to adopt a “rehabilitation plan” to ensure the viability of the fund. 29 U.S.C. § 1085 (a)(2)(A). As part of such a rehabilitation plan, subject to qualifications set forth within the PPA, a pension plan may cut “adjustable benefits,” 29 U.S.C. § 1085…