In San Francisco Taxi Coalition v. City and County of San Francisco, published November 9, 2020, the 9th Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part judgment on the pleadings for the defendant city. In light of ride-sharing businesses eroding demand for taxi service, and the fact that recent taxi medallion purchasers paid $250,000 to the city for each medallion, the city enacted regulations favoring recent medallion purchasers for, e.g., lucrative airport rides. A group of drivers holding older medallions alleged that the regulations violate equal protection, due process, CEQA, and age discrimination under Government Code section 11135 (prohibiting state actions that discriminate based on age).
The 9th Circuit agreed with the district court that the plaintiff failed to state a claim. Because no suspect class is involved, only rational basis review applies. There is a rational basis for favoring newer medallion purchasers, because the regulations reduce traffic at the airport, encourage drivers to service the city rather than the airport, and mitigate economic fallout for newer medallion owners. All are legitimate government actions. The regulations do not violate CEQA because they do not involve a "project" as defined by CEQA. Finally, Government Code section 11135 does not apply to the regulations because the state does not directly fund the challenged program. The 9th Circuit affirmed dismissal of the federal claims with prejudiced, but remanded the state law claims to the district court for possible amendment.
Comments