Law Center Search Results

In Mid-Con, the Supreme Court also held that a state law that imposes an annual fee of $100 upon each truck licensed in that state is not preempted by a provision of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) that precludes states from imposing a “State registration requirement” in excess of $10 per truck. 49 U.S.C. § 14504(b). In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Souter, the Court reasoned that the “State registration requirement” in this provision of ISTEA refers only to state law procedures for complying with the federal Single State Registration System (SSRS) codified in 49 U.S.C. § 14504. The SSRS, in turn, regulates state law procedures for evidencing proof of insurance and a federal trucking permit and identifying an agent for service of process. The Court concluded that the Michigan statute at issue was not a “State registration requirement” within the meaning of the ISTEA because it made no reference to any of the items regulated by the SSRS, and Michigan had imposed a separate fee on trucks license-plated in Michigan well before the SSRS was enacted. In dissent, Justice Kennedy, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice O’Connor, argued that the words “State registration requirement” cannot be limited to only those requirements governed by the SSRS. Rather, “State registration requirement” should be construed to mean any state requirement imposed on an interstate motor carrier in a State, including Michigan’s $100 per-truck fee. This case is important to any business involved in interstate motor carriage and, more generally, to any business that operates in an area where a federal statute defines the scope of federal preemption of state regulation.

Decision Below: 662 N.W.2d 784 (Mich. 2003)