Healthcare Assn. of New York State, Inc., et al. v. Cuomo (formerly Paterson), et al.

Preemption of State Law by National Labor Relations Act

NCLC's Position

NCLC urged the district court to permanently enjoin enforcement of a New York law that curtails the ability of employers who receive funds from the state from using those funds to oppose unionization. In its brief, NCLC argued that New York enacted the law to further its labor agenda, and that the law is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The Supreme Court recently struck down a similar California law in Chamber of Commerce v. Brown, where California sought to regulate employer activity in a zone protected by the NLRA from interference by the states.

Previously, NCLC asked the district court to declare that the NLRA preempts the New York law. In that brief, NCLC argued that New York enacted the law to further its labor policies and therefore is preempted per the Supreme Court's intervening decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Brown. NCLC urged the court to declare the New York law as facially preempted, without further fact-finding.

NCLC also participated in this case at the 2nd Circuit in 2006, and in the district court in 2004.

Case Outcome

Previously, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York ruled that it is not bound by the Second Circuit's mandate in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Brown. In 2006, the Second Circuit overturned a district court ruling that a New York law restricting employers from using state money to encourage or discourage union organizing is preempted by federal labor law, and remanded the case back to district court for factual development. 

On 9/7/11, the District Court held that N.Y. LAB. LAW § 211-a is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act under the doctrine of Machinists preemption, and the state is permanently enjoined from implementing or enforcing the statute.

Procedural History

Amicus brief filed with district court 11/12/03. Oral argument on motion to dismiss held 9/13/04. Amicus letter filed with district court 11/9/04. Decided 5/17/05. Notice of appeal filed 5/25/05. Amicus brief filed with Second Circuit filed 12/7/05. Decided 12/5/06. Subsequent amicus brief filed 9/16/08, after Supreme Court's decision in Chamber v. Brown. District court ruling on remand 3/23/10. Amicus brief on remand filed 5/28/10.  Decided 9/7/11.

Case Documents