Harris

Chinatown Neighborhood Ass'n v. Harris

Good Law
33 F. Supp. 3d 1085·2014 WL 1245047·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40432
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 25, 2014Case No. 12-cv-03759-WHOCalifornia9,768 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Orrick, J.

Re: Dkt. Nos. 58,

ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS

The State of California has made it “unlawful for any person to possess, sell, offer for sale, trade, or distribute a shark fin.” Cal. Fish & Game Code §§ 2021 and 2021.5 (the “Shark Fin Law”). The official findings of the California legislature cite environmental, humanitarian, and health reasons in support of the Shark Fin Law. Plaintiffs Chinatown Neighborhood Association and Asian Americans for Political Advancement challenge the Shark Fin Law because it allegedly discriminates against Chinese Californians since shark fins are a significant part of Chinese culture, and contend that it is unconstitutional because it denies them equal protection of the law, violates the Commerce Clause, is preempted by the federal Magnuson Stevens Act (“MSA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1801 et seq., and deprives them of their constitutional rights under color of state law.

Defendants Kamala Harris, Attorney General of the State of California, and Charlton H. Bonham, Director of the Cali *1091 fornia Department of Fish and Wildlife (collectively, “defendants”), who are responsible for enforcing the California Fish and Game Code, and…

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.