Steel Institute of New York v. City of New York
716 F.3d 31
2d Cir.2013Background
- Steel Institute sues NYC challenging crane/hoisting regs as preempted by OSHA/OSHA regulations; seeks declaratory and injunctive relief.
- District Court granted City's summary judgment; Steel Institute appeals only preemption ruling.
- OSHA amended crane regs on Aug 9, 2010, effective Nov 8, 2010; preamble cites federalism and disclaims preemption of non-conflicting local codes.
- District Court relied on Gade v. NSWM A to hold city regs saved as general applicability; deference given to Secretary of Labor’s interpretation.
- NYC Building Code Chapter 33 regulates construction safety and crane use; scope excludes cranes used in industrial plants; regulates both public safety and workers, thus dual-impact.
- Court reviews preemption de novo; analyzes whether city regs are preempted by federal standards where OSHA governs construction cranes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether NYC crane regs are preempted by OSHA standards. | Steel Institute argues dual-impact regs conflict with OSHA. | City argues regs are not preempted or saved as general applicability. | Preemption unless saved as general applicability. |
| Whether Gade general-applicability exception applies to save NYC regs. | Gade does not apply; regs target workplace safety. | Gade exception applies because laws are generally applicable and do not conflict with OSHA. | Regulations saved as laws of general applicability. |
| What weight to give OSHA’s views on preemption. | Some weight; OSHA views align with result that local regs do not preempted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gade v. Nat'l Solid Wastes Mgmt. Ass’n, 505 U.S. 88 (1992) (dual-impact/cannot preempt general safety concerns; general-applicability exception to preemption)
- Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr, 518 U.S. 470 (1996) (presumption against preemption in police powers; breadth of regulation considered)
- Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000) (presumption against preemption; evaluate regulatory scheme as a whole)
- Ny. SMSA Ltd. P'ship v. Town of Clarkstown, 612 F.3d 97 (2d Cir. 2010) (context of preemption and state/local regulation under federal standards)
- Wyeth v. Levine, 555 U.S. 555 (2009) (weight given to agency interpretation in preemption analysis)
- Associated Builders & Contractors Florida East Coast Chapter v. Miami-Dade County, 594 F.3d 1321 (11th Cir. 2010) (distinguishable; wind-load ordinance not saved as general-applicability)