Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 897239.pdf

Citation: Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 897239.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/897239.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,737 chars

relationships and its affect on airline prices and services is only indirect and tenuous.

As discussed above, Proposition 1 establishes minimum wage and other employee

protections-it does not directly regulate airline prices and services. The fact that

Proposition 1 may impose costs on airlines and therefore affect fares is

inconsequential. As the First Circuit noted, holding that a state law is preempted in

that circumstance "would effectively exempt airlines from state taxes, state lawsuits of

many kinds, and perhaps most other state regulation of any consequence." DiFiore,

646 F.3d at 89. Interpreting the "relate to" provision of the ADA so broadly would be

"a project doomed to failure, since, as many a curbstone philosopher has observed,

everything is related to everything else." Cal. Div. of Labor Standards Enforcement

v. Dillingham Constr., NA, 519 U.S. 316, 335, 117 S. Ct. 832, 136 L. Ed. 2d 791

(1997) (Scalia, J., concurring). We refuse to adopt such a broad reading of the ADA's

preemption provision and hold that the ADA does not preempt Proposition 1.

38
             
Fila Foods, LLC v. City ofSeaTac
89723-9

IV Dormant Commerce Clause

Filo Foods's final contention is that Proposition 1 violates the dormant

commerce clause. U.S. CONST. art. I,§ 8, cl. 3. The trial court rejected this argument.

So do we.

The United States Supreme Court has "long interpreted the Commerce Clause

as an implicit restraint on state authority" to discriminate against or place burdens on

interstate commerce. United Haulers Ass 'n v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Mgmt.

Auth., 550 U.S. 330, 338, 127 S. Ct. 1786, 167 L. Ed. 2d 655 (2007). The first