Archives

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on October 6, 2014 By Kira Klatchko

Here are last week’s published decisions involving local governments:

Second Circuit

Raspardo v. Carlone, No. 12-1686 (Oct. 6, 2014): In 1983 Title VII employment discrimination case brought by female police officers alleging hostile work environment and disparate treatment, the court affirmed denial of qualified immunity for one officer on hostile-work-environment claim, and reversed denial of qualified immunity for other officers.
Sunrise Detox V, LLC v. City of White Plains, No. 13-2911 (Oct. 2, 2014): In case in which City denied request for facility to provide care for those recovering from alcohol and drug abuse because facility did not satisfy zoning requirements, the court affirmed district court’s determination that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over ADA suit. Suit was not ripe because applicant had not sought variance or appealed the zoning decision.
Grogan v. Blooming Grove Volunteer Ambulance Corps, No. 13-656 (Sept. 29, 2014): The court affirmed dismissal of 1983 action after it determined that private emergency medical care and general ambulance services contracted for by municipality do not constitute “state action.”

Ninth Circuit: City’s Pioneering Drug-Disposal Ordinance Does Not Violate Commerce Clause

Posted in Case Notes on October 1, 2014 By Kira Klatchko

If your medicine cabinet is filled with old prescriptions and other medications that you no longer want or can use, you might have asked: how and where should I get rid of these?

Local governments are beginning to provide an answer. Old medications are not only misused, they also pose dangers for the environment. Flushing pills or putting them in the trash can contaminate drinking water and cause other environmental problems.

But disposal programs can be expensive. What’s a local government to do?

Alameda County, California, devised a solution. It passed a Safe Drug Disposal Ordinance that requires any prescription drug producer who sells, offers for sale, or distributes drugs in the County to participate in a program to collect and dispose of the County’s unwanted drugs.

Manufacturers and distributors objected, however. They claimed that requiring them to pay for the program violates the dormant Commerce Clause because it discriminates against or directly regulates interstate commerce. Are they right?

On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit said that the program does not violate the Commerce Clause.

The court ruled that Continue reading →

Supreme Court Calls for Further Analysis of Tax Case

Posted in Case Notes IMLA Briefs on January 13, 2014 By Kira Klatchko

This morning, the Supreme Court called for the views of the United States Solicitor General (“CVSG”) on whether the Court should grant cert in Comptroller of the Treasury of Md v. Wynne, No. 13-485. The case concerns how the dormant commerce clause limits local taxation.

The Court uses the CVSG procedure with respect to only about 10 petitions a year. It indicates at least some degree of interest: the chances of a cert-grant increase significantly in such cases.

IMLA and its partners filed the only amicus brief in the case, which we discussed here.

(Photo courtesy of Flickr by Mark Fischer, creative-commons license, no changes made)

Fourth Circuit: Can a County Limit Waste Disposal to Public Landfills?

Posted in Case Notes on December 3, 2013 By Kira Klatchko

A County ordinance provides that waste generated in the County can be disposed at only a single location — a publicly owned landfill:

The dumping or depositing by any person at any place other than at the designated facilities of any acceptable waste generated within the County is prohibited.

The County crafted the ordinance to further many public benefits: to conserve resources, to prevent pollution, and to protect the public health, safety, and well-being. For the public landfill, the ordinance also ensured a revenue stream.

But for a private landfill operator located just two miles from the County line, the ordinance was a real problem. The ordinance led to a significant decrease in its business.

The operator sued the County. It argued that the County ordinance violates the dormant-commerce clause and the equal-protection clause of the federal constitution. Is the operator correct?

In Sandlands C&D LLC v. County of Horry, No. 13-1134 (Dec. 3, 2013), the Fourth Circuit ruled against the operator. It upheld the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the County.

Applying the Supreme Court’s decision in United Haulers Ass’n v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management Authority, 550 U.S. 330, 346 (2007), the court ruled that Continue reading →

Does the Dormant Commerce Clause Prohibit a State from Taxing All of Its Residents’ Income?

Posted in IMLA Briefs on November 22, 2013 By Kira Klatchko

A recent cert petition raises an important question about how the federal Constitution limits State and local taxing authority.

In Maryland State Comptroller of the Treasury v. Wynne, the Maryland Court of Appeals held that the dormant Commerce Clause requires every state and subdivision to give its residents a full tax credit for all income taxes that they pay in another state or subdivision. The U.S. Supreme Court has never applied the dormant Commerce Clause to reach that result, and it appears to conflict with cases in other states. Not surprisngly then, the Maryland State Comptroller of the Treasury has asked the Supreme Court to take the case.

This week, IMLA joined the United States Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Counties, the International City/County Management Association, and the Maryland Association of Counties in filing an amicus brief supporting the petition. The brief argues that the decision violates basic principles of federalism, and is inconsistent with the State’s sovereign powers to tax its residents.

We’ll continue to monitor the case and will bring you any updates.