Monday, September 25, 2006
Edward Zelinsky (Cardozo; Visting Yale) has posted on SSRN his forthcoming piece in the Cardozo Law Review entitled: Maryland's Wal-Mart Act: Policy and Preemption.
Here's the abstract:
Maryland's Wal-Mart Act raises two fundamental questions: Is the Act legal? Does the Act represent sound policy?
With respect to the legality of the Maryland statute, I conclude that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) preempts the Maryland law. As a matter of policy, the Maryland statute is ill-conceived. The Maryland Act raises prices on Wal-Mart's predominantly low-income customers and, for the long run, will reduce Wal-Mart's employment.
In the final analysis, Maryland's Wal-Mart Act is a poorly-designed exercise in political symbolism, rather than a carefully-crafted response to the pressing problem of health care in America.
I've read this piece in its entirety and am quite familiar with the topic of ERISA preemption being discussed. With that being said, this is a must-read piece for anyone interested in this quickly developing area of ERISA health care law. Here's the link.