Mathis

Mathis v. Pacific Gas and Electric Co.

Good Law
75 F.3d 498
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 24, 1996Nos. 93-55390, 93-55391 and 93-56215California3,783 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kozinski, J.

This case presents a question of abiding importance: How deeply may the government get involved in the actions of a private party before we subject these acts to constitutional strictures? For better or worse, almost everyone these days occasionally acts under the influence of government regulations. But normally, it’s only governmental actions, taken in the name of the public, backed by the threat of organized force, and financed with tax dollars, that are subject to constitutional requirements, including procedural fairness and equal protection. While we sometimes treat acts of private parties as public, we do so sparingly. “Careful adherence to the ‘state action’ requirement preserves an area of individual freedom by limiting the reach of federal law and federal judicial power.” Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922, 936 , 102 S.Ct. 2744, 2753 , 73 L.Ed.2d 482 (1982).

I

In late 1984, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG & E) began an undercover investigation to pursue rumors of drug use at its Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. When the investigation ended in June 1985, one of those caught in its net was James Mathis, an employee of Bechtel Power Corporation, which had…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.