Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Los Angeles, County of v. Adams

Citation: 8 ELR 20280
No. No. 76-2089, 574 F.2d 607/(D.C. Cir., 03/07/1978)

The court affirms dismissal of the complaint in an action challenging Department of Transportation regulations requiring that urban mass transit or highway projects for which federal funding is sought be endorsed by designated metropolitan planning organizations as consistent with a long-range development plan. The court determines that the regulations are within the Department's statutory authority under 23 U.S.C. §§ 105(d) and 134 and concludes that the administrative scheme in this case, unlike that invalidated in National League of Cities v. Usery, 420 U.S. 833, does not violate the Tenth Amendment because it does not undercut the state's sovereign powers.

Counsel for Plaintiff-Apellant
Donald A. Carr, Charles S. Rhyne, William S. Rhyne
Rhyne & Rhyne
839 17th St. NW, Washington DC 20005
(202) 347-7992

Counsel for Defendants-Appellees
Thomas J. Tourish, Jr., Ass't U.S. Attorney; Earl J. Silbert, U.S. Attorney; John A. Terry, William D. Pease, Robert M. Werdig, Jr; Ass't U.S. Attorneys
U.S. Courthouse, Constitution Ave. & John Marshall Place NW, Washington DC 20001
(202) 426-7561

Counsel for Amicus Curiae State of Oklahoma
Floyd W. Taylor
Office of Attorney General
112 State Capitol, Oklahoma City OK 73105
(405) 521-3921

Counsel for Amicus Curiae Commonwealth of Virginia
Walter A. McFarlane, Deputy Attorney General
140 E. Broad, St., Richmond VA 23219
(804) 786-2911

Before BAZELON, Chief Judge, and LEVENTHAL and ROBINSON, Circuit Judges.