Green Mountain Railroad Corporation v. State Of Vermont

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that ICCTA preempted state environmental law that \unduly interfere[d] with interstate commerce by giving the local body the ability to deny the carrier the right to construct facilities or conduct operations\ (internal quotation marks omitted)
• noting that the FSTB, which is “uniquely qualified to determine whether state law should be preempted” by the ICCTA, has ruled that “state and local permitting or preclearance requirements (including environmental requirements
• explaining that certain public health and safety laws survive preemption under the ICCTA
• finding state law preempted where the “requirements [of the law] are not set forth in any schedule or regulation that the railroad can consult in order to assure compliance”
• noting a state’s “generally applicable, non-discriminatory [law] would seem to withstand [ICCTA] preemption”
• analyzing § 10501(b) and generally noting that “direct environmental regulations enacted for the protection of the public health and safety, and other generally applicable, non- discriminatory regulations and permit requirements would seem to withstand preemption”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).