Wash. Sup. Ct. holds federal spending statute violates constitutional federalism principles

[John Noble]

I cannot think of another state supreme court decision holding that a
federal law violated the 10th Amendment, presumably because the issue
almost invariably arises in federal courts exercising federal question
jurisdiction. Can anyone point to others? Is there any jurisprudence
regarding the cert-worthiness of a state court judgment holding a federal
law unconstitutional, as opposed to circuit conflict, importance of the
issue, etc.?

In a nutshell, the case holds that a federal statute barring the discovery
in state court litigation of traffic accident data collected by state
agencies pursuant to federal law violates the 10th Amendment. The traffic
accident reports are required to apply for federal highway funds used to
remedy local road hazards. The federal law barring discovery of the data in
state court proceedings was adopted to prevent their use as evidence that
the state or local government was aware of a hazard, a fact that is often
dispositive on the issue of liability. The Court distinguishes between the
reports compiled for the application for federal funds (which may be
protected by the federal evidentiary privilege) and the underlying data
which is used to compile the reports required by the federal program, but
which is collected anyway, without regard to whether it is ever used to
apply for federal funds. The Court acknowledges "a sufficient nexus exists
between interstate commerce and the Federal-aid highway system to justify
the "regulatory scheme when considered as a whole," citing Hodel v.
Indiana, but notes that under Hodel, "we must also determine whether the
'challenged provisions are an integral part of the regulatory program.'"
The Court concludes that federal interference with the scope of discovery
in state court is not integral to the federal regulatory regime, nor
authorized by implication under the Necessary and Proper clause or Spending
power.

John Noble

At 1:26 PM -0400 9/22/01, Eugene Volokh wrote:
>    Guillen v. Pierce County, 2001 WL 1045031 (Wash. Sup. Ct. Sept. 13),
><http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=wa&vol=2001_sc/68535-5&invol=3>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=wa&vol=2001_sc/68535-5&invol=3,
>holds that a federal spending statute imposes a federalism-violating
>unconstitutional condition on the state judicial system.
>
>    Eugene