Wed, Apr 23, 2003
Tuesday, AOPA asked a federal judge in Michigan to
issue a summary judgment in the association's lawsuit against the
state's pilot background check law. "The state of Michigan does not
dispute the facts of this case," said AOPA Counsel Kathy Yodice.
"All that remains is for the court to decide whether or not, as
AOPA contends, federal law preempts the state's background check
law under the U.S Constitution's Supremacy Clause (Article VI,
clause 2). Today's motion asks the judge to proceed straight to his
ruling."
Both the FAA and the Transportation Security Administration have
written letters supporting AOPA's position. In its filing, AOPA
argues that the Michigan law is preempted both because of the
pervasiveness of federal regulation in aviation safety and security
matters as well as setting pilot eligibility standards, and because
the state law conflicts with federal efforts to create a uniform
national standard.
Citing numerous sections of the U.S. Code, AOPA
argues, "Congress clearly mandated that the FAA consider national
security in carrying out its functions, creating a 'culture' of
security consideration. Many of the safety functions of the FAA
inherently contain an element of aviation security and national
security. Thus, there is a general scheme placing the
responsibility for aviation security regulation, for the purposes
of national security and safety, in the federal government's
exclusive domain.
"The FAA is no longer the only agency responsible for aviation
security. Congress vested sweeping authority over security in the
TSA. "Together with the explicit and vast law of Congress governing
aviation security, the TSA's and the FAA's exercise of their
security powers occupy the field of aviation security. Thus, states
have no room to maneuver in that field."
AOPA's motion concludes, "To date, the intent of
the United States Congress and the authority conferred on the U.S.
Government Agencies remains manifest that aviation security is
exclusively a federal government responsibility, so that a uniform,
appropriate system can be maintained nationwide. ... For all of the
reasons presented to this Court, AOPA respectfully requests that
this Court grant the attached Motion for Summary Judgment."
More News
Maximum Authorized Altitude A published altitude representing the maximum usable altitude or flight level for an airspace structure or route segment. It is the highest altitude on >[...]
Aero Linx: Soaring Safety Foundation (SSF) The Soaring Safety Foundation (SSF) is the Training and Safety arm of the Soaring Society of America (SSA). Our mission is to provide ins>[...]
From 2013 (YouTube Version): Dracula Lives On Through Kyle Franklin... and We're NOT Scared! ANN CEO and Editor-in-Chief, Jim Campbell speaks with Aerobatic and airshow master, Kyl>[...]
“For Montaer Aircraft it is a very prudent move to incorporate such reliable institution as Ocala Aviation, with the background of decades in training experience and aviation>[...]
Also: ForeFlight Upgrades, Cicare USA, Vittorazi Engines, EarthX We have a number of late-breaking news highlights from the 2024 Innovation Preview... which was PACKED with real ne>[...]