Texas Ass’n of Business v. City of Austin: Appellate Brief by the City of Austin

Brief filed by the City of Austin before the Texas 3rd Court of Appeals arguing that the state’s minimum wage law does not preempt the city’s Earned Sick Time Ordinance, that the city had a rational basis for enacting the ordinance, and that the court should not temporarily enjoin the enforcement of the ordinance while it is being challenged.

View the Appellate Brief

Read More
El Cenzino v. Texas: Decision

District Court decision granting a preliminary injunction against parts of Texas’s SB4, which would prevent municipalities from establishing “sanctuary city” policies and impose penalties against localities that do so. The decision holds that a provision blocking local government entities and officials from “endorsing” sanctuary city policies likely violates the First Amendment, that provisions prohibiting localities from adopting certain policies, patterns or practices regarding immigration enforcement and cooperation are likely unconstitutionally vague under the 14th Amendment, that a provision forcing local jails to honor ICE detention requests likely violates the Fourth Amendment, and that a provision requiring local police departments to allow their officers to provide enforcement assistance of federal immigration law was likely preempted by federal immigration law.

View the Decision

Read More
Pennsylvania Restaurant and Lodging Assoc. v. Pittsburgh: Decision

Pennsylvania appellate court decision holding that Pittsburgh lacked the authority to enact a paid sick time ordinance because 2nd class cities—like Pittsburgh—are statutorily barred from enacting “business regulations.” The dissent argues that Pittsburgh’s paid sick time ordinance was a valid use of its police powers to enact ordinances to protect health and safety. This case is currently being appealed.

View the Decision

Read More
United Food and Commercial Workers Local 99 v. Arizona: Decision

Arizona Superior Court decision holding that an Arizona law preempting local regulation of employee benefits was invalid because the Voter Protection Act prevents the state Legislature from amending or superseding voter-approved initiatives unless the state law either furthers the purposes of the initiative or is passed by a three-fourths majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and Arizona voters had previously approved an initiative that explicitly preserved the power of municipalities to regulate “wages and other benefits.

View the Decision

Read More
ArizonaAdam PolaskiLabor
Florida Carry, Inc. v. Tallahassee: Decision

Florida Appellate Court decision holding that Tallahassee legislators were not personally liable for failing to rescind decades old firearms regulations in light of a state punitive preemption law prescribing inpidual liability for local legislators “promulgating” firearms regulations. This decision did not reach the merits of whether the state law’s use punitive preemption is unconstitutional and is currently being appealed.

Read the Decision

Read More