Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority v. Citizens for the Abatement of Aircraft Noise
United States Supreme Court
501 U.S. 252 (1991)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Federally owned Washington National Airport (National) served the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. Congress passed legislation transferring National’s operational control to a new, state-run Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (airports authority) (defendant). To protect the federal government’s interest in maintaining National as a key transportation hub for federal personnel, Congress included a so-called condition of transfer in the legislation. In accordance with that condition of transfer, state authorities agreed to (1) put the airports authority’s everyday operations in the hands of state-appointed directors and (2) subject the directors’ decisions to veto by a board of review consisting entirely of members of congressional panels charged with authority over air transportation but ostensibly acting in their individual capacities as representatives of local airport customers. Once the transfer took effect, the airports authority made a controversial decision to expand National. The Citizens for the Abatement of Aircraft Noise, Inc. (citizens) (plaintiff) sued to stop the expansion. The federal district court dismissed citizens’ suit. The District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the condition of transfer violated the constitutional separation of powers. The United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the airports authority’s appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)
Dissent (White, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.