Pierce County v. Guillen
Respondents are a consolidated group of personal injury plaintiffs who sought access to accident reports and other materials and data held by the local government relating to the traffic history of the sites of their respective car accidents. Petitioners denied access to the records because they were declared confidential or privileged under state and federal law. The Supreme Court of Washington held in relevant part that (1) the federal statute exceeds congressional power insofar as it makes state and local traffic and accident materials and data non-discoverable and inadmissible in state and local courts, simply because they are also ”collected” and used for federal purposes; and (2) the personal injury plaintiffs had standing to challenge the constitutionality of the federal statute even if state officials opposed the challenge.
Questions Presented:
1. Is 23 U.S.C. ยง 409, a federal statute that protects certain documents ”compiled or collected” in connection with certain federal highway safety programs from being discovered or
admitted in federal or state trials, a valid exercise of Congress's power under the supremacy, spending, commerce, or necessary and proper clauses of the Constitution?
2. Do private plaintiffs have standing to assert ”states' rights” under the 10th Amendment when their state's legislative and executive branches expressly approve and accept benefits
and terms of the federal statute in question?
