Almost lost in election news coverage was the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals’ decision Nov. 1 sustaining dismissal of
California’s unfair competition lawsuits against energy producers,
who California alleged defrauded the State’s electricity consumers
during the energy crisis in 2000 and 2001.
Dear Editor,
Almost lost in election news coverage was the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision Nov. 1 sustaining dismissal of California’s unfair competition lawsuits against energy producers, who California alleged defrauded the State’s electricity consumers during the energy crisis in 2000 and 2001.
Applying the doctrine of federal preemption, the court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over interstate wholesale power rates, and therefore, states have no regulatory authority over the subject.
Parallels abound under this constitutional doctrine, e.g. transportation of people and goods in interstate and foreign commerce.
So, I think that local government officials should recognize the court’s interpretation when considering their responses to Native American casino proposals. If the state cannot enforce its unfair competition laws, state laws and local ordinances about the casinos may also be unenforceable, and fall in the face of federal preemption.
Caveat viator!
Joseph P. Thompson, Tres Piños
