Labor preemption conflicts between state and local governments

This article does not receive scheduled updates. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia. Contact our team to suggest an update.

Ballotpedia's coverage of state and local preemption conflicts

Preemption conflicts by policy Coronavirus • Energy infrastructure Firearms • GMO Labor • LGBT • Marijuana Plastic bags Police department budgets Ridesharing Sanctuary jurisdictions • Soda taxes

Other storylines: Sharing economy Municipal partisanship

Last updated: January 12, 2023

Ballotpedia covers preemption conflicts between state and local governments in several policy areas. Preemption occurs when law at a higher level of government is used to overrule authority at a lower level. This page summarizes preemption conflicts over labor policy. To learn more about other preemption conflicts, click here.

Municipalities across the country have sought local control over policies impacting the labor market, such as paid sick leave and the minimum wage.

Labor preemption conflicts are listed below by the year in which they began; some conflicts extend for years as legal challenges are pursued and resolved. Ballotpedia adds updates to the entries below as we find them.

Email [email protected] to notify us of updates or new labor-related preemption stories.

Labor preemption conflicts overview
Year	State	Summary
2022	Colorado	Colorado passed a law expanding the collective bargaining rights of county employees.
2022	Washington	Washington passed a law preempting certain local ordinances regarding rideshare drivers and companies.
2021	Tennessee	Tennessee passed a law preempting localities from instituting certain regulations related to contractors, which preempted proposed legislation in Nashville relating to construction health and safety regulations.
2020	Minnesota	The Minnesota Supreme Court upheld a Minneapolis sick time ordinance, ruling it was not preempted by state law.
2020	Texas	A federal judge blocked a Dallas paid sick leave ordinance on the grounds that it was preempted by state law.
2019	Colorado	Colorado became the first state to repeal a state law preempting local wage regulation.
2019	Maine	Maine’s state government passed a bill regulating paid leave earnings that also included a preemption clause.
2019	North Dakota	The governor signed a bill into law that would prohibit local governments from setting a minimum wage greater than the state’s minimum wage.
2018	Wisconsin	A bill was passed by the state prohibiting local governments from enacting employment ordinances related to a range of subjects.
2018	Texas	The Texas Third District Court of Appeals ruled Austin’s paid sick leave ordinance was unconstitutional, saying it was preempted by the state’s minimum wage law.
2017	New York	A New York Supreme Court judge upheld a set of New York City ordinances regulating scheduling for restaurant workers on the grounds that the city’s ordinances did not infringe on state prerogatives.
2017	Washington	An income tax approved by the Seattle City Council was struck down in court. According to a 1984 state law, the city did not have authority to impose the income tax without approval from the state legislature.
2017	Iowa	The governor signed a bill into law that would prohibit local governments from setting a minimum wage greater than the state’s minimum wage.
2017	Florida	An ordinance passed in Miami Beach to raise the minimum wage was struck down in court on the grounds that it violated a state law barring localities from setting their own minimum wages.
2017	Minnesota	The governor of Minnesota vetoed a bill that would have prohibited local ordinances from setting minimum wage or paid leave requirements higher than the state mandated.
2017	Missouri	A bill was passed by the state legislature to preempt local minimum wage regulations, namely those in St. Louis and Kansas City.
2017	Ohio	A Cuyahoga County judge permanently blocked a state law that would have preempted Cleveland’s Fannie Lewis Law, which regulated hiring at public construction projects.
2016	Alabama	The Alabama State Legislature passed a law to preempt a minimum wage ordinance passed by the Birmingham City Council. The Alabama NAACP filed a lawsuit on the grounds that the law was unconstitutional, but the case was dismissed by the Eleventh Circuit.
2015	Pennsylvania	The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld a Pittsburgh paid sick leave ordinance, saying that the city has authority based on the Pennsylvania Disease Prevention and Control Law.
2011	Wisconsin	In response to a proposed paid sick leave ballot measure in Milwaukee, a state law was passed preempting local paid sick leave ordinances.

2022

Colorado: Bill signed into law expanding the collective bargaining rights of county employees

On May 27, 2022, Gov. Jared Polis (D) signed SB22-230 into law, which gave the public employees of a county the right to:

“

Organize, form, join, or assist an employee organization or refrain from doing so; Engage in collective bargaining; Engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection; Communicate with other county employees and with employee organization representatives and receive and distribute literature regarding employee organization issues; and Have an exclusive representative at formal discussions concerning a grievance, a personnel policy or practice, or any other condition of employment.

”

According to Colorado Politics' Hannah Metzger, SB22-230 "extends collective bargaining rights to approximately 36,000 county employees throughout the state. The bill provides the rights in most counties with populations over 7,500, allowing county employees the opportunity to unionize and bargain on pay, job safety and other issues."

Washington: Bill signed into law preempting local ordinances concerning rideshare drivers

On March 31, 2022, Gov. Jay Inslee (D) signed House Bill 2076 (H.B. 2076) into law, which preempted certain local ordinances regarding rideshare drivers and companies by establishing policies like a minimum wage for such drivers, classifying them as independent contractors, and requiring state regulations of such companies. According to GeekWire's Lisa Stiffler, the bill would:

“

set a minimum wage for drivers during the time they have passengers, with a higher rate for drivers in larger cities; the rates are tied to the state’s minimum wage and increase accordingly; provide drivers with paid sick leave, which is accrued only during the time they’re carrying passengers; creates the Driver Resource Center, an organization managed by the state’s Department of Labor and Industry that provides employment protections for drivers; establishes rights for drivers, including their ability to work the hours they want and allowing them to drive for multiple ride-hailing companies at once; sets statewide regulations for the ride-hailing companies; instructs the state to form a stakeholder group to decide how the companies and drivers will fund unemployment benefits, paid family medical leave and long-term care benefits.

”

According to The National Law Review's Brian Lundgren wrote that before the bill's passage, "Many Washington counties, cities, and airports [had] enacted local ordinances and entered into operating agreements covering [transportation network company drivers]."

Supporters of the bill included the Washington State Labor Council, Teamsters Local 117, and rideshare companies Lyft and Uber. Jen Hensely, Lyft's head of government relations, described the bill as a compromise between companies and drivers, saying, "This bill represents an historic opportunity to extend Washington state's social safety net to drivers on our platforms."

Opponents of the bill included Drive Forward Seattle, a nonprofit, and the Massachusetts AFL-CIO, both of whom wanted drivers classified as employees. State Rep. Debra Entenman (D) said, "This bill requires too much from the state, delivers too little for drivers, and increases transportation costs for my constituents who often rely on rideshare companies because of inadequate public transportation options."

2021

Tennessee: Bill signed into law preempting certain contractor regulations

On April 22, 2021, Governor Bill Lee (R) signed HB 1112 into law, which preempts local government entities from:

“

requiring a prime or subcontractor (collectively referred to as "contractors" in this Bill Summary), as part of a contract to improve real property, to: (1) Obtain or gather personnel information or data of the contractor's employees except to the extent required under federal or state law; (2) Provide personnel information or data of the contractor's employees to any person or entity except to the extent required by federal or state law; (3) Adhere to safety and health standards in excess of that required under OSHA and TOSHA rules; (4) Provide access to a worksite to anyone who would not otherwise have a legal right to access the worksite under federal or state law; or (5) Provide access to personnel information or data of anyone furnishing labor or materials on a worksite to a third party unless otherwise required by federal or state law.

”

The new law preempted proposed city council legislation in Nashville that aimed to increased health and safety oversight on construction projects funded by the locality.

Tennessee House Majority Leader William Lamberth (R) said in support of HB1112: "They [contractors] move throughout this entire state, so it's important that you have statewide standards so that you have portability of different resources and companies that can actually fulfill the needs of different communities." Joy Styles, a member of the Nashville Metro Council who co-sponsored the Nashville legislation, said in response to the passage of HB 1112: "What the state requires is very loose, and what this bill [Nashville's legislation] is asking is very specific. If the standards for the state were good enough, we wouldn't have to create this legislation."

2020

Texas: Judge blocks Dallas paid sick leave ordinance

A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction against a Dallas, Texas, paid sick leave ordinance on March 30, 2020. On March 31, 2021, federal judge Sean Jordan of the Eastern District of Texas issued a permanent injunction against the paid sick leave ordinance.

The state of Texas along with ESI/Employee Solutions LP and Hagan Law Group LLC challenged the ordinance, which the city passed earlier that year, in federal court.

The Dallas ordinance would require employers to provide one hour of paid sick leave per 30 hours worked to all employees who work at least 80 hours in the city per year.

While issuing the preliminary injunction, Judge Jordan wrote, "Whether or not paid sick leave requirements should be imposed by government on private employers is an important public policy issue. ... The state of Texas, through its constitutional structure and statutory law, has committed that public policy decision to the Texas Legislature."

Dallas City Councilman Adam Bazaldua said, "I was proud to join a city council that fought for this right to be implemented and I remain proud to stand with this body as we fight this ruling and continue to fight for the hard working people of Dallas."

The Texas Public Policy Foundation represented the two companies in the case. The foundation's attorney Robert Henneke said, "It’s not constitutional for cities to interfere with the employer-employee relationship in this manner pre-empted by state law."

The lawsuit over the paid sick leave ordinance in Dallas mirrored cases involving similar ordinances in other Texas cities such as Austin and San Antonio, both of which were also enjoined in separate cases.

Minnesota: Minneapolis Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST) ordinance upheld by Minnesota Supreme Court

On June 10, 2020, the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the Minneapolis Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST) ordinance. The ordinance, passed in 2016, sets standards for accrual of sick and safe time based on hours worked and requires employers to allow that time to carry into the next year provided it does not exceed 80 hours. The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce challenged the ordinance, saying it was preempted by state law.

Justice Natalie Hudson ruled in the court's opinion:

“

The City’s ordinance governing employee sick and safe time does not pose an irreconcilable conflict with state law, and state law does not occupy the field of employer-provided sick and safe leave. State law therefore does not preempt the ordinance.

”

2019

Colorado: Bill signed into law repealing state's wage preemption law

On May 28, 2019, Gov. Jared Polis (D) signed HB19-1210 into law. HB19-1210 "allows a unit of local government to establish a minimum wage for individuals performing, or expected to perform, 4 or more hours of work for an employer in the local government's jurisdiction," provided certain conditions are met. These conditions include:

“

Prior to enacting a minimum wage law, the local government is required to consult with surrounding local governments and various stakeholders; A minimum wage established by a local government must provide a tip offset equal to the tip offset provided in the state constitution; The minimum wage law must not apply to time spent in a local government's jurisdiction solely for the purpose of traveling through the jurisdiction to a destination outside of the local government's boundaries; All employed adult employees and emancipated minors shall be paid not less than the enacted minimum wage; A local minimum wage increase must take effect on the same date as a scheduled increase to the statewide minimum wage; and If a local minimum wage exceeds the statewide minimum wage, the local government may only increase the local minimum wage each year by up to $1.75 or 15%, whichever is higher.

”

According to the National Employment Law Project, this was the first time a state legislature repealed a local wage preemption law.

Maine: Gov. Mills signs paid leave bill preempting local laws

On May 28, 2019, Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D) signed a bill into law requiring most employers with more than 10 employees to allow employees to earn one hour of paid leave time for every 40 hours worked and up to 40 hours of paid leave time in a year.

The law exempted seasonal employers from the paid leave requirement and included a preemption clause: "A municipality or other political subdivision may not enact an ordinance or other rule purporting to have the force of law under its home rule or other authority regulating earned paid leave." The law was set to take effect in January 2021.

A previous version of the bill would have required employers with more than five employees to provide one hour of paid leave for every 30 hours of work and did not include a preemption clause. The bill faced early opposition from groups including the Maine Hospital Association and the Retail Association of Maine. Retail Association Executive Director Curtis Picard stated his group would support the bill if it applied to employers with at least 15 employees, exempted seasonal employers, and included the preemption clause.

North Dakota: Gov. Burgum signs law prohibiting local governments from raising minimum wage

On March 27, 2019, Gov. Doug Burgum (R) signed a bill prohibiting local governments from setting a minimum wage greater than the state's minimum wage. The bill passed the North Dakota House of Representatives by a vote of 73-20 and the North Dakota State Senate by a 35-11 vote.

The National Federation of Independent Business wrote, "We support this measure as a means of preempting mandated wage increase as it's just another tax on small business that will discourage job growth. Furthermore, there's nothing in the bill preventing businesses from paying above minimum wage."

Fargo Mayor Tim Mahoney disagreed with the bill, saying, "I think the local cities should be allowed to think, to make a local decision and do the things that would best serve their community."

2018

Wisconsin: Gov. Walker signs law prohibiting cities from enacting employment ordinances

Republican Gov. Scott Walker signed AB 748, which prohibits local governments from enacting employment ordinances related to hours and overtime, employment benefits, wages, and an employer's right to obtain salary information from prospective employees, among others. The bill passed the Wisconsin State Assembly on February 22, 58 to 32, and was approved by the Wisconsin State Senate on March 20, 18 to 14. The legislature sent the bill to the governor after agreeing to amendments on March 22.

Rep. Rob Hutton (R) said AB 748 "establishes certainty for employees so that they know that they may receive the same treatment from the business and the government no matter where they are located."

Sen. Kathleen Vinehout (D) disagreed, saying different industries required different standards: "The county’s association which is of course is [sic] opposed to taking away their local powers are concerned that they’re not going to be able to regulate employee hours or overtime, benefits, discrimination in any particular industry in their county."

More than two dozen other states have prohibited local governments from enacting similar laws and ordinances, according to Lexology.

Texas: Austin paid sick leave ordinance ruled unconstitutional

On November 16, 2018, the Texas Third District Court of Appeals ruled Austin's paid sick leave ordinance was unconstitutional, saying it was preempted by the state's minimum wage law.

The Texas Public Policy Foundation filed a lawsuit against the city of Austin in district court on April 24, 2018, regarding the city's paid sick leave ordinance. As passed, the ordinance required private businesses to provide paid sick leave and safe leave of up to eight calendar days per year. It allowed employees who work at least 80 hours in a calendar year to accrue paid sick and safe leave at a rate of one hour for every 30 hours worked. The ordinance was set to go into effect on October 1, 2018, for businesses with five or more employees, and on October 1, 2020, for smaller employers.

The Texas Public Policy Foundation, representing several plaintiffs including the Texas Association of Business and the National Federation of Independent Business, argued the ordinance violated the Texas Constitution and preempted state minimum wage law. Jeff Moseley, CEO of the Texas Business Administration, said the organization thought "the best place for sick leave to be settled is with the employer and employee, not with some vague and unenforceable ordinance." Will Newton, state executive director of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, said Austin's ordinance would "create a patchwork of rules and regulations that are difficult for small businesses to navigate." Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed an intervening plea in support of the lawsuit.

The city of Austin said it stood by the ordinance.

On June 25, District Judge Tim Sulak ruled against the Texas Public Policy Foundation's request to block the ordinance from going into effect. On August 17, the Texas Third District Court of Appeals temporarily halted the ordinance while an appeal of Judge Sulak's decision was ongoing. The court said its ruling did not reflect an opinion on the merits of the case.

On November 16, a three-judge panel of the Third District Court of Appeals ordered District Judge Sulak to issue a temporary injunction against the ordinance. They also remanded the case back to the district court for further review. The appellate court ruled the ordinance was unconstitutional because it increased wages, violating the Texas Minimum Wage Act (TMWA). The TMWA prohibited municipalities from regulating private employee wages.

On August 16, 2018, San Antonio became the second city in Texas to approve a paid sick leave ordinance. The city council voted 9-2 for the measure, which would allow workers to accrue up to 64 hours of paid sick leave per year. It was set to go into effect on January 1, 2019.

2017

New York: New York City approves scheduling rights for restaurant workers

Mayor Bill de Blasio signed city ordinances on May 30, 2017, requiring fast food restaurants to give workers two weeks' notice of their schedules and provide breaks of at least 11 hours between shifts. The ordinances also prohibited fast food restaurants from requiring workers to spend unpaid time on call and established penalties of between $10 and $75 per violation.

The city's new regulations were supported by the Service Employees International Union and other unions, which said they would help avoid last-minute cuts to their members' shifts and reduce conflicts between members' work schedules and childcare needs. The New York State Restaurant Association, which opposed the regulations, said they would burden businesses with added costs and record-keeping requirements.

In 2018, the International Franchise Association, the Restaurant Law Center, and the New York State Restaurant Association challenged the law, arguing that state law prohibits municipalities from enacting regulations on hours of employment or wages. In February 2020, a judge of the New York Supreme Court 1st Judicial District rejected the suit, stating that the city's law "does not infringe on State prerogatives."

Washington: Court strikes down Seattle income tax ordinance

See also: Municipal elections in Seattle, Washington (2017)

City Councilwoman Lisa Herbold

On December 8, 2017, Seattle asked the Washington Supreme Court to review a November superior court ruling striking down an income tax it approved in July 2017. The court denied the request to review the case in April 2020.

On July 10, 2017, the Seattle City Council unanimously approved a 2.25 percent income tax on single residents with annual earnings above $250,000 and married residents with joint annual incomes above $500,000. The passage of the ordinance met the July 10 deadline set by the council on May 1, 2017, for adoption of "a progressive income tax targeting high-income households."

City Councilwoman Lisa Herbold, who cosponsored the income tax measure, argued that "an increasing affordability gap between the have and have nots" made the tax necessary. "The middle class is being squeezed as well," she said. "And one of the reasons is our outdated, regressive and unfair tax structure."

The income tax had attracted four legal challenges by November 17, 2017. Plaintiffs argued that the city did not have the authority to impose the tax without state legislative approval and that a 1984 state law prohibits localities like Seattle from taxing net income. Seattle responded that its tax was an excise tax on total income rather than a net income tax and that it was authorized by the state legislature, but Superior Court Judge John Ruhl rejected the city's arguments. "To the extent that the Ordinance purports to impose a tax on the 'privilege' of receiving pay for labor, such a 'privilege' is not a valid basis for an excise tax," he said in his November 2017 ruling on the combined lawsuits. "In short, the city's tax, which is labeled, 'Income Tax,' is exactly that. It cannot be restyled as an 'excise tax' on the alternate 'privileges' of receiving revenue or choosing to live in Seattle."

Iowa: State legislators preempt county minimum wage rates

On March 30, 2017, Gov. Terry Branstad (R) signed a bill, HF 295, that prohibited local governments from setting their minimum wages above the state's minimum wage rate and invalidated higher minimum wages that had been enacted by the state's localities in previous years.

Johnson County approved a proposal in September 2015 to raise its minimum wage above the state's $7.25 per hour rate, to at least $8.20 in 2015 and $10.10 by 2017. In September 2016, Linn County, Polk County, and Wapello County enacted ordinances to raise their minimum wages to $10.25, $10.75, and $10.10, respectively, by 2019. The four counties' minimum wage increases were retroactively voided by HF 295.

Florida: Court strikes down Miami Beach minimum wage ordinance

In December 2017, an appellate court struck down a minimum wage ordinance approved unanimously by the Miami Beach city commission in June 2016.

The ordinance, which was originally slated to go into effect on January 1, 2018, would set the city's minimum wage at $10.31 per hour in 2018 and increase it to $13.31 by 2021. In December 2016, the Florida Retail Federation, the Florida Restaurant & Lodging Association, and the Florida Chamber of Commerce filed suit against the ordinance on the grounds that it violated a state law barring localities from setting their own minimum wages. State Attorney General Pam Bondi (R) joined the suit in January 2017 to defend the state law.

Miami Beach argued that a 2004 constitutional amendment that set the state's minimum wage above the federal minimum also allowed the city to set a local minimum wage above the $8.10 per hour state minimum that went into effect on January 1, 2018. Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Peter Lopez rejected the city's argument in March 2017, and his ruling was upheld by the Third District Court of Appeals in December.

Miami Beach asked the Florida Supreme Court to review the appellate court ruling. The court had scheduled a hearing for March 2019, but in February 2019, the court decided not to hear the case.

Minnesota: Governor vetos minimum wage and paid leave preemption bill

On March 3, 2017, the Minnesota House of Representatives voted 76-53 to prohibit local ordinances that set minimum wage or paid leave requirements higher than state mandates. State Rep. Pat Garofalo (R), who introduced the bill in response to the 2016 passage of paid sick leave ordinances in Minneapolis and St. Paul, said, "There are 854 cities in Minnesota. It is unrealistic and unproductive to have 854 labor laws across the state." Minneapolis City Councilwoman Lisa Bender defended proposals like Minneapolis' paid sick leave ordinance as efforts to address "the very real situation of families in our community for whom one or two days of missed pay means being able to pay rent or not."

The Minnesota State Senate approved the state House proposal on April 20, 2017. The legislature initially packaged the preemption bill as part of its budget bill but reached an agreement with Gov. Mark Dayton (D) in May 2017 to present it as a standalone bill instead. Dayton pledged at the time to veto the standalone bill, and he followed through with the veto on May 30, 2017.

Missouri: State preempts St. Louis minimum wage ordinance

On June 30, 2017, Gov. Eric Greitens (R) announced that he would allow a bill preempting a St. Louis minimum wage ordinance to take effect without his signature. HB 1194, which was passed by the Missouri State Legislature in May, set the statewide minimum wage at $7.70 per hour, effective August 28, 2017.

The St. Louis City Council had approved an ordinance in 2015 increasing the city's minimum wage to $10 per hour in 2017 and $11 in 2018. McDonald's worker Bettie Douglas, who supported the increase, said, "Everybody that works deserves a livable wage... We're working for billion-dollar companies. They can afford to give us a raise." Greitens countered that, "Despite the promises of liberal politicians and politicians in the city of St. Louis, the policy that they engage with would've actually had the exact opposite effect. It would've led to fewer jobs and lower pay."

Although he agreed with the preemption bill's objective, Greitens allowed it to become law without his signature because he disagreed with the way in which state legislators developed it. "Politicians in the legislature could’ve come up with a timely solution to this problem. Instead, they dragged their feet for months. Now, because of their failures, we have different wages across the state. It’s created uncertainty for small businesses. And it all could have been avoided if the politicians had done their job on time," he said. "I disapprove of the way politicians handled this. That’s why I won’t be signing my name to their bill."

Missouri: State preempts Kansas City minimum wage ordinance

Kansas City voters approved a ballot measure to raise the city's minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2022 on August 8, 2017. The increase went into effect on August 24, 2017, but was nullified by the state preemption bill HB 1194 four days later.

Supporters of an increase in the city's minimum wage had submitted signatures in May 2015 to put a $15 minimum wage on the November ballot. The Kansas City Council approved an ordinance to increase the minimum wage to $13 in July 2015, but the group behind the initiative petition continued its push for $15. The city council agreed in August 2015 to move the proposal to the ballot, and opponents of both minimum wage increases launched a veto referendum to overturn the $13 ordinance.

The $15 initiative and the referendum to overturn the $13 ordinance were both certified for the November 2015 ballot, but the state legislature passed a bill, HB 722, in the interim that voided the ordinance and rendered the referendum unnecessary. A circuit court in Jackson County subsequently removed the $15 initiative from the ballot.

The initiative's backers appealed the Jackson County Circuit Court ruling to the Missouri Supreme Court in October 2015. The supreme court reversed the circuit court decision in January 2017, and ordered the initiative to be placed on the August 2017 ballot.

Ohio: County judge blocks state contractor hiring law

On January 31, 2017, Cuyahoga County Judge Michael Russo permanently blocked HB 180, a state law preempting Cleveland's Fannie Lewis Law. The Fannie Lewis Law requires city contractors to hire local workers for at least 20 percent of the construction hours on public projects of $100,000 or more.

HB 180's sponsor, state Rep. Ron Maag (R), argued that requirements like Cleveland's Fannie Lewis Law prevent construction workers from other parts of the state from getting jobs in large cities. However, Russo found that his proposal was unconstitutional. "H.B. 180 violates the Ohio Constitution by infringing upon the City's Home Rule powers of self-government," he said, adding that it, "violates the Ohio Constitution by infringing upon the City's Home Rule authority to adopt and enforce within the City's limits such local police, sanitary and other similar regulations, as are not in conflict with the general laws."

2016

Alabama: State legislature blocks Birmingham's minimum wage ordinance

The Alabama State Legislature voted in February 2016 to preempt a minimum wage ordinance passed unanimously by the Birmingham City Council in August 2015. State legislators said that the ordinance, which would have increased the city's minimum wage from $7.25 per hour in 2015 to $10.10 in 2017, ran counter to the state's interest in maintaining a uniform statewide rate.

The Alabama NAACP filed a federal lawsuit against the preemption law in May 2016 on the grounds that it was unconstitutional. Teresa Tritch of The New York Times reported that "the Alabama NAACP and other plaintiffs assert that the nullification bill was motivated by racism and, as such, violates the Equal Protection clause of the United States Constitution." U.S. District Judge David Proctor dismissed the suit on February 1, 2017, citing a lack of factual evidence of racial discrimination. The plaintiffs appealed Proctor's ruling on March 2, 2017.

On July 25, 2018, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed Judge Proctor's decision, ruling that the state's preemption law violated the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection rights. The judges wrote that the plaintiffs "stated a plausible claim that" the state preemption law "had the purpose and effect of discriminating against Birmingham's black citizens." According to NPR, the ruling did not mean the wage increase would go into effect but that challengers of the law would "likely be able to take their case to court."

On June 25, 2019, the full Eleventh Circuit appeals court heard arguments to decide whether a challenge to the state law would be able to proceed. In December 2019, the court upheld Judge Proctor's dismissal of the suit, stating that the plaintiffs "failed to establish that their injuries (while real and cognizable) are fairly traceable to the attorney general’s conduct or that those injuries would be redressed by a decision in their favor."

2015

Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Supreme Court upholds Pittsburgh's paid sick leave law

On December 21, 2015, Common Pleas Court Judge Joseph James struck down a paid sick leave ordinance approved by the Pittsburgh City Council earlier in the year.

The Pennsylvania Restaurant and Lodging Association and five city businesses brought suit against the ordinance, which required employers to pay workers for at least one hour of sick leave per 35 hours of work, on the grounds that Pittsburgh didn't have the authority to regulate businesses without express state approval. Pittsburgh argued that the Pennsylvania Disease Prevention and Control Law gave it the authority to enact the ordinance, but James rejected the city's argument. He found that the law the city cited applied only to municipalities with boards or departments of health and that Pittsburgh had neither. The city appealed the decision in the Commonwealth Court, and the appeal was rejected in 2017. The state supreme court then took up the case.

On July 17, 2019, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that Pittsburgh's paid sick leave law could stand, saying the city does have the authority based on the Pennsylvania Disease Prevention and Control Law.

2011

Wisconsin: State legislature approves preemption of Milwaukee's paid sick leave referendum

Gov. Scott Walker (R) signed SB 23, a state law preempting local paid sick leave ordinances, in May 2011. SB 23 was proposed in response to a paid sick leave ballot measure approved by Milwaukee voters in 2008. The Milwaukee measure required employers to provide at least one hour of paid leave for every 30 hours worked by a full-time employee.

The state Senate passed SB 23 on March 3, 2011, and the state Assembly approved it on April 12, 2011. Paid leave supporters attempted to defend the Milwaukee ordinance in the courts, but Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Thomas Cooper ruled in July 2011 that it had been preempted by SB 23.

See also

Local Politics	2021 Election Analysis	Preemption conflicts
Municipal government Local courts School boards Local ballot measures Local recalls	Municipal elections, 2021 Local court elections, 2021 School board elections, 2021 Local ballot measure elections, 2021 Political recall efforts, 2021	Coronavirus • Energy infrastructure Firearms • GMOs • Labor LGBT • Marijuana Plastic bags Police department budgets Ridesharing Sanctuary jurisdictions • Soda taxes