With apologies to Michael Palin in “A Fish Called Wanda.” I note today’s California First District Court of Appeal decision in “People vs. BNSF.”
The opening paragraphs say it all:
"General order No. 135 of the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regulates the length of time a stopped railroad train may block public grade crossings. Appellant Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) was convicted, after a bench trial, of a misdemeanor violation of that order. (Pub. Util. Code, § 2110.) BNSF appeals the conviction.
“The question we address is whether the PUC general order on which the conviction is based is preempted by either the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA; 49 U.S.C. § 10101 et seq.) or the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA; 49 U.S.C. § 20101 et seq.). The trial court found the order not to be preempted by either the ICCTA or the FRSA. We conclude that PUC general order No. 135 is preempted by federal law and, accordingly, reverse the judgment.”
As Yogi would say, it’s déjà vu all over again.
20-page majority opinion, a 13-page concurring opinion, 34 pages total - for a $1,000 fine and $170 costs (this time). Pretty well written, too, IMHO - an informative recitation of the facts (check out the role of the UP Dipatcher !) and a thorough analysis:
“The People have not cited, and we have not discovered through our independent research, a single case in which a court considered ICCTA preemption and concluded that an antiblocking regulation was not preempted.” [bottom of page 17]
Or a sure cure for insomnia . . . [:-^] [swg]
Thanks for sharing !
Paul, our judges out here have enough trouble with California law sometimes. Often times, when they get into Federal statutes, they are really lost in Wonderland. The concurring opinion, as did the local prosecutor, blurs the distinction between “safety” and “convenience” and thus gets himself wrapped around something that is really not on point.
Anyway, another in an unbroken string of crossing-blocking laws or orders overturned. Now with the published decision, the lower courts have their marching orders.
You want a crossing that is not blocked by trains, you can build an overpass.