- On March 18, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California dismissed for lack of standing a complaint brought by the Department of Justice (DOJ) against the State of California. The complaint sought to invalidate certain provisions of California law regulating the sale of eggs in California, including Proposition 12 and AB 1437, on the grounds that such laws were allegedly preempted by the federal Egg Products Inspection Act. We recently blogged about a similar DOJ lawsuit against the state of Michigan.
- The Court recited the tenet that a plaintiff bears the burden of asserting Article III standing which consists of injury in fact, causation, and redressability. The Court rejected the DOJ’s argument that the mere existence of a preempted state law would create injury to the federal government. Preemption provisions should not be read to operate directly on the states, but rather to confer upon private parties the right to engage in certain conduct subject to only federal constraints.
- The Court noted that if the mere existence of a preempted state law conferred injury to the federal government, it might permit or even require the federal government to involve itself in every civil suit where the defendant moves to dismiss on preemption grounds. Such sweeping power of the federal government to involve itself in lawsuits created “[t]he potential for abuse of the federal courts for political purposes.”
