Publication Date
11-2006
Journal
Cardozo Law Review
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.
Volume
28
First Page
847
Publisher
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
Keywords
Wal-Mart, Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), Preemption
Disciplines
Health Law and Policy | Insurance Law | Jurisdiction | Law | State and Local Government Law
Recommended Citation
Edward A. Zelinsky,
Maryland’s "Wal-Mart" Act: Policy and Preemption,
28
Cardozo L. Rev.
847
(2006).
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles/226
Included in
Health Law and Policy Commons, Insurance Law Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons
