California v. United States Department of Labor

Good Law
76 F. Supp. 3d 1125·2014 WL 7409478·202 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3077·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178455
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 30, 2014Civ. No. 2:13-cv-2069 KJM DADCalifornia11,201 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Mueller, J.

*1128 ORDER

This case considers the intersection between a state’s interest in public pension reform and provisions of the Urban Mass Transportation Act (UMTA) requiring •state transit to ensure the preservation and continuation of collective bargaining rights as a condition of receiving federal funding for mass transit projects.

The case was before the court on September 30, 2014 for hearing on defendants’ motion to dismiss or for summary judgment, ECF No. 9, plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment, ECF No. 54, and defendant’s subsequent motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ Spending Clause claim. ECF No. 64. Stephen Higgins and Kathleen Kraft appeared for plaintiffs Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT) 1 and the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans); Ryan Parker and Susan Ullman appeared for defendants Perez and the Department of Labor (collectively DOL); Jeffrey Freund and Benjamin Lunch appeared for amicus Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU). There was no appearance for amicus Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART). After considering the parties’ arguments, the court GRANTS defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ Spending Clause claim, but DENIES its motion to…

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.