Case Updates
District Court grants U.S. Chamber stipulated final judgment permanently enjoining enforcement of California Assembly Bill 51, which would have prohibited arbitration agreements as a condition of employment
January 02, 2024
The Court also awarded the Chamber attorneys’ fees.
The law, A.B. 51, would have made it criminal for employers to require workers to agree to arbitration as a condition of employment.
Previously, the Ninth Circuit agreed with the Chamber that California cannot evade the Federal Arbitration Act – which protects arbitration agreements – by prohibiting employers from entering such agreements in the first place.
The Chamber’s win ensures that employers and employees in California will continue to reap the benefits of arbitration, which studies have shown is a faster, simpler, and less expensive means of resolving disputes than litigation.
Ninth Circuit affirms injunction against enforcement of California’s Assembly Bill 51, which would have essentially prohibited arbitration agreements in the employment context
February 15, 2023
Click here to view the opinion.
Ninth Circuit grants panel rehearing, withdraws the panel opinion, and resubmits the case to the panel
August 22, 2022
Click here to view the order.
U.S. Chamber and coplaintiffs file 28(j) letter explaining how Viking River confirms that the FAA preempts California’s anti-arbitration A.B. 51 and rehearing en banc is warranted
June 28, 2022
Click here to view the letter.
Ninth Circuit defers consideration of rehearing petition until the Supreme Court decides Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana
February 14, 2022
Click here to view the order.
U.S. Chamber files reply brief in support of rehearing petition
December 21, 2021
Click here to view the brief.
U.S. Chamber and coplaintiffs petition for rehearing en banc after divided Ninth Circuit panel holds that California’s anti-arbitration A.B. 51 is not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act
October 20, 2021
Click here to view the petition.
Divided Ninth Circuit holds that California’s anti-arbitration legislation AB 51 is not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act
September 15, 2021
Click here to view the opinion. As Judge Sandra Ikuta stressed in her dissent, the majority decision is clearly wrong, violates U.S. Supreme Court precedent, and runs contrary to decisions of many other courts. The U.S. Chamber will pursue further review of this flawed decision.
U.S. Chamber and co-plaintiffs file response brief defending preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of California’s anti-arbitration A.B. 51
August 17, 2020
Click here to view the brief. Andrew J. Pincus, Archis A. Parasharami, and Daniel E. Jones of Mayer Brown LLP served as co-counsel for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on behalf of the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center.
The U.S. Chamber and its business coalition partners filed the initial Federal Arbitration Act preemption challenge to A.B. 51 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.
Case Documents
- Defendants-Appellants' Opening Brief -- Chamber of Commerce v. Becerra (Ninth Circuit).pdf
- Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellees -- Chamber of Commerce v. Becerra (Ninth Circuit).pdf
- Opinion -- Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (Ninth Circuit).pdf
- U.S. Chamber Petition for Rehearing En Banc -- Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (Ninth Circuit).pdf
- U.S. Chamber Co-Plaintiffs Reply Brief -- Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (Ninth Circuit).pdf
- Order re Rehearing -- Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (Ninth Circuit).pdf
- 28(j) Letter -- Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (Ninth Circuit).pdf
- Order Granting Rehearing -- Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (Ninth Circuit).pdf
- Opinion (rehearing) -- Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (Ninth Circuit).pdf
- Order re Permanent Injunction -- Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (UDSC - Eastern District of California)
- Final Judgment -- Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta (Ninth Circuit)