Taiheiyo Cement Corp. v. Superior Court

“It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country. ” (New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann (1932) 285 U.S. 262, 311 [ 76 L.Ed. 747 , 52 S.Ct. 371 ] (dis. opn. of Brandeis, J.), italics added.)

I join in the majority opinion, which I have signed and which I believe is compelled by the United States Supreme Court opinion in American Ins. Ass’n v. Garamendi (2003) 539 U.S. 396 [ 156 L.Ed.2d 376 , 123 S.Ct. 2374 ] (Garamendi). As an intermediate appellate court we are obligated to follow United States Supreme Court precedent in matters involving federal constitutional law. (See Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. v. Martin (1931) 283 U.S. 209, 220-221 [ 75 L.Ed. 983 , 51 S.Ct. 453, 458 ]; Perkins Mfg. Co. v. Jordan (1927) 200 Cal. 667, 678 [ 254 P. 551 ]; People v. Superior Court (Moore) (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1202, 1211 [ 58 Cal.Rptr.2d 205 ].)

I write separately only to note the consequences of applying implied preemption in this setting. Certainly, the federal government in making executive agreements or treaties can expressly…

*385 Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Code of Civil Procedure section 354.6 1 allows certain individuals who were “slave labor” or “forced labor” victims during World War II (WWII) to recover compensation for unpaid labor and personal injuries suffered at the hands of “the Nazi regime, its allies and sympathizers, or enterprises transacting business in any of the areas occupied by or under control of the Nazi regime or its allies and sympathizers.” (§ 354.6, subd. (a)(1) & (2).) On January 15, 2003, we decided section 354.6 was constitutional because the lawsuits authorized by the statute did not impermissibly infringe upon the federal government’s exclusive power over foreign affairs, and because the Treaty of Peace with Japan that formally ended WWII between the United States and Japan (1951 Treaty) did not demonstrate a clear intent to bar the wartime claims of Korean nationals.

The California Supreme Court granted review and transferred this case back to us with instructions to vacate our opinion and reconsider it in light of American Ins. Ass’n v. Garamendi (2003) 539 U.S. 396 [ 156 L.Ed.2d 376 , 123 S.Ct. 2374 ] (Garamendi), decided by the United States Supreme Court on June 23,…

O'Melveny & Myers, John F. Niblock, Washington, DC; McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen, David M. Balabanian; Morrison & Foerster, Lloyd Aubry, Arne D. Wagner, San Francisco; Pillsbury Winthrop, Barbara Croutch; Bingham Dana, Matthew Digby; Bingham McCutchen, Matthew Digby; and Sullivan & Cromwell, Los Angeles and Robert A. Sacks for Mitsubishi Materials Corp., Mitsubishi Materials U.S.A. Corp., Mitsui & Co., Ltd., Mitsui & Co. (U.S.A.), Inc., Mitsubishi International Corp., Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., IHI, Inc., Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc., Mitsui Mining Co., Ltd., Mitsui Mining U.S.A., Inc., Nippon Steel Corporation, Nippon Steel U.S.A., Inc., Nippon Steel Trading Co., Ltd., and Nippon Steel Trading America, Inc., as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioners.

Debra W. Yang and John S. Gordon, United States Attorneys; Peter D. Keisler and Robert D. McCallum, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General; James G. Hergen, Washington, DC and Lara A. Ballard, United States Department of State; and Mark Stern, Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, Eric Miller and Kathleen Kane, United States Department of Justice, for the United States of…