Employer Mandates and ERISA Preemption: A Critique of Golden Gate Restaurant Association v. San Francisco

32 Pages Posted: 14 Nov 2008 Last revised: 27 Nov 2009

See all articles by Edward A. Zelinsky

Edward A. Zelinsky

Yeshiva University - Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Abstract

The Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Golden Gate Restaurant Association v. San Francisco saves the employer mandate of the San Francisco ordinance from ERISA preemption by slighting the language of the statute and by misapplying the U.S. Supreme Court's existing case law under ERISA Section 514(a). If (as is likely) the Supreme Court rules upon the ERISA status of employer mandates like San Francisco's by adhering to its past decisions, the Court will strike such mandates as ERISA-preempted. Under current law, the Ninth Circuit's opinion in Golden Gate II is not sustainable.

Keywords: ERISA, preemption, health care, San Francisco

Suggested Citation

Zelinsky, Edward A., Employer Mandates and ERISA Preemption: A Critique of Golden Gate Restaurant Association v. San Francisco. State Tax Notes, 2008, Cardozo Legal Studies Research Paper No. 246, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1299128

Edward A. Zelinsky (Contact Author)

Yeshiva University - Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law ( email )

55 Fifth Ave.
New York, NY 10003
United States
212-790-0277 (Phone)

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
259
Abstract Views
2,599
rank
129,439
PlumX Metrics