Appeals court blocks DC ban on hazardous shipments
(Reuters circulated the following article on May 3.)
WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court overturned a lower court ruling on Tuesday that would permit the city of Washington to temporarily prohibit rail shipments of hazardous materials on security grounds.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit sided with freight rail giant CSX Corp., which had sought a preliminary injunction against the ordinance to reroute tankers hauling flammable gases and explosives around the capital.
CSX said the restriction, which covered an area within two miles of the U.S. Capitol building, was preempted by federal law. The company also said the ban would disrupt its sprawling rail network and the economy. CSX has two freight lines running through the Washington area.
The Bush administration supported the company’s position, and the three-judge appeals panel found that CSX met the minimum standard for obtaining an injunction. The panel ordered U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan to grant the company’s request.
District officials and CSX could not immediately be reached for comment.
The appeals judges said securing government buildings and operations from potential attack was a federal concern, not a local responsibility. They also said that the district’s ban unfairly restricted CSX’s operations.
The court does not minimize the calamitous consequences of a terrorist attack on a rail car transporting banned materials through the district,'' the appeals court said. The effect of the (city’s ban), however, is simply to shift this risk or at least some of the risk to other jurisdictions.‘’
D.C. officials fear hazardous chemicals and other substances could be inviting targets for attacks, and imposed the 90-day ban earlier this year out of frustration with federal security efforts to protect the capital.
I don’t know what the district judge who ruled against CSX was thinking. Everyone knew it would get reversed on appeal.
I think the Appellate court got it right (in surprisingly short time). That having been said, I hope there is a real plan for fighting bio-terrorism attacks on trains.
How about that, a judge who can read the plain text of the law. Local routing bans were preempted about 20 years ago. This is the first time anyone has been goofy enough to try it.
I heard a story…the truthfulness of which I can’t verify…
During the initial hearing the CSX attorney that presented the CSX case was totally dismissive and demeaning of the Judge that was hearing the case that the initial ruling was not ‘really’ on the merits of the case but an ‘in your face’ reaction to the obnoxious CSX attorney. The attorney is reported to be a now ex-employee.
My limited education in Transportation Law from college tells me that DC or any other State or Local government does not have the authority to restrict Interstate Transportation, that is an area that is reserved for the Federal Government.
I am inclined to disagree with it for one reason. As someone who works for an appellate judge, I can tell you that the LAST thing a judge wants to do is get reversed by a higher court. Although lawyers overstep their boundaries all of the time to the ire of judges, I don’t think a judge would allow that to affect the outcome of a case. It would be like chopping off his foot to spite his toe. The judge at issue had to know this case would be appealed—all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary; I doubt the judge would have deliberately done this to himself—as I am sure I am not the only lawyer in America wondering “what the heck was this guy thinking?”
Also, you are about 95% correct as to your statement of law. You are 5% wrong because the States restrict and regulate interstate commerce all of the time—speed limits, safety regulations, work rules, the list goes on and on. Such State regulation of interstate commerce is typically impermissible when the regulation (A) directly conflicts with a federal regulation or (B) if it materially burdens interstate commerce—and even under B, there are instances where it is still permissible.
Where State regulation typically gets struck down as unconstitut
In the Washington Post article it mentioned the Sierra Club was behind the city. Surely the Sierra club doesn’t have a major interest in homeland security or rail operations. Wonder what they were upto?
I don’t know, usually the Sierra Club is very pro-railroad. They keep telling Texas that if they would build a rail line instead of its new highway system they would jump up and down in song.
Good for CSX! I think anyways that if we’re expecting the terrorists to strike in a particular location in a particular way, they’re NOT going to do what we’re expecting them to do! Let’s not forget how we all felt (shocked and caught off guard) on September 11th!
Mac: You are right. The DC City Council was goofy enough to try to pass a law forbidding the CSX from transporting hazmats through Washington, DC. What this is is nothing more than “feel good” legislation, and I think the District Court judge overstepped his authority in trying to broker a deal between CSX, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Justice. It seemed to me the District Court Judge biased, and he was planning to rule in favor of the D.C. City Council anyhow
Gabe: You are right. The question is why did the judge do it? Did he really think he wouldn’t be reversed on appeal?