57 Cited authorities

  1. Gregory v. Ashcroft

    501 U.S. 452 (1991)   Cited 873 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal law does not preempt Missouri's mandatory judicial retirement age
  2. Printz v. United States

    521 U.S. 898 (1997)   Cited 676 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding unconstitutional a statute obligating state law enforcement officers to implement a federal gun-control law
  3. Hines v. Davidowitz

    312 U.S. 52 (1941)   Cited 2,044 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Alien Registration Act of 1940 preempted Pennsylvania's alien registration requirements
  4. Building & Construction Trades Council of the Metropolitan District v. Associated Builders & Contractors of Massachusetts/Rhode Island, Inc.

    507 U.S. 218 (1993)   Cited 307 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Boston's requiring a no-strike provision in subcontractor agreements was permissible market participation because the city was "attempting to ensure an efficient project that would be completed as quickly and effectively as possible" and because "analogous private conduct would be permitted"
  5. Capital Cities Cable, Inc. v. Crisp

    467 U.S. 691 (1984)   Cited 348 times
    Holding ban pre-empted by Federal Communications Commission regulations
  6. City of Columbus v. Ours Garage Wreckerservice, Inc.

    536 U.S. 424 (2002)   Cited 197 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding safety regulatory exception extends to municipalities
  7. Dan's City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey

    569 U.S. 251 (2013)   Cited 116 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that claims brought under the New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act were not preempted by the FAAAA because the unfair conduct alleged – the storage and disposal of a car - was not "sufficiently connected to a motor carrier's service with respect to the transportation of property to warrant preemption"
  8. Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp.

    426 U.S. 794 (1976)   Cited 324 times
    Holding that state acting as a buyer of scrap metal is a market participant
  9. Wisconsin Dept. of Industry v. Gould Inc.

    475 U.S. 282 (1986)   Cited 239 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Wisconsin law prohibiting state procurement agents from purchasing products from repeat NLRA violators was not protected by the market participant doctrine because the statute "functioned] unambiguously as a supplemental sanction for violations of the NLRA" rather than as state proprietary action
  10. White v. Mass. Council of Constr. Employers

    460 U.S. 204 (1983)   Cited 208 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “when a state or local government enters the market as a participant it is not subject to the restraints of the Commerce Clause”
  11. Section 10101 - Rail transportation policy

    49 U.S.C. § 10101   Cited 714 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Articulating objective of "promot[ing] a safe and efficient rail transportation system by allowing rail carriers to earn adequate revenues"
  12. Section 6250

    Cal. Gov. Code § 6250   Cited 399 times   10 Legal Analyses

    In enacting this chapter, the Legislature, mindful of the right of individuals to privacy, finds and declares that access to information concerning the conduct of the people's business is a fundamental and necessary right of every person in this state. Ca. Gov. Code § 6250

  13. Section 21080

    Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21080   Cited 145 times   2 Legal Analyses

    (a) Except as otherwise provided in this division, this division shall apply to discretionary projects proposed to be carried out or approved by public agencies, including, but not limited to, the enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, the issuance of zoning variances, the issuance of conditional use permits, and the approval of tentative subdivision maps unless the project is exempt from this division. (b) This division does not apply to any of the following activities: (1) Ministerial projects

  14. Section 93000

    Cal. Gov. Code § 93000   Cited 3 times

    This title shall be known and may be cited as the North Coast Railroad Authority Closure and Transition to Trails Act. Ca. Gov. Code § 93000 Amended by Stats 2018 ch 934 (SB 1029),s 3, eff. 1/1/2019.

  15. Section 14556.40

    Cal. Gov. Code § 14556.40   Cited 2 times

    (a) The following projects are eligible for grants from the fund for the purposes and amounts specified: (1) BART to San Jose; extend BART from Fremont to Downtown San Jose in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. Seven hundred twenty-five million dollars ($725,000,000). The lead applicant is the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. (2) Fremont-South Bay Commuter Rail; acquire rail line and start commuter rail service between Fremont and San Jose in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. Thirty-five

  16. Section 185000

    Cal. Pub. Util. Code § 185000   Cited 1 times

    This division shall be known, and may be cited, as the California High-Speed Rail Act. Ca. Pub. Util. Code § 185000

  17. Section 185020

    Cal. Pub. Util. Code § 185020   Cited 1 times

    (a) There is in the Transportation Agency a High-Speed Rail Authority. (b) (1) The authority is composed of 11 members as follows: (A) Five members appointed by the Governor. (B) Two members appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules. (C) Two members appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly. (D) One Member of the Senate appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules and one Member of the Assembly appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly shall be ex officio members without vote and shall participate in

  18. Section 185033

    Cal. Pub. Util. Code § 185033

    (a) The authority shall prepare, publish, adopt, and submit to the Legislature, not later than May 1, 2014, and every two years thereafter, a business plan. At least 60 days prior to the publication of the plan, the authority shall publish a draft business plan for public review and comment. The draft plan shall also be submitted to the Senate Committee on Transportation and Housing, the Assembly Committee on Transportation, the Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, and the Assembly Committee

  19. Section 15378 - Project

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15378   Cited 45 times   2 Legal Analyses

    (a) "Project" means the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and that is any of the following: (1) An activity directly undertaken by any public agency including but not limited to public works construction and related activities clearing or grading of land, improvements to existing public structures, enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, and the