Massachusetts Coastal Railroad LLC, et al. v. Chad Marsh

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”), in an issue of first impression and upon a sua sponte transfer from the Massachusetts Appeals Court, held that the Massachusetts Prevailing Wage Law, Mass.Gen.Law ch. 149, §§ 26-27H, was not preempted by the ICC Termination Act of 1995, as amended, 49 U.S.C. § 10501 et seq. (“ICCTA”). In rendering its decision, the SJC ignored the plain and expansive preemption language of the ICCTA that “the remedies provided under this part with respect to regulation of rail transportation are exclusive and preempt the remedies provided under Federal or State law.” 49 U.S.C. § 10501(b). The SJC’s decision also ignored a long line of federal cases that held that the ICCTA expressly preempts state statutes regulating a railroad’s economic decisions. The doctrine of implied preemption also applies here in the form of both “field” and “conflict” preemption, and the SJC was required to apply such preemption as it pertains to the Massachusetts Prevailing Wage Law. The question presented is: 1. Whether the ICCTA preempts Massachusetts’ prevailing wage act for railroad maintenance workers.