You saw in Case 46-3 that state law could be preempted by federal law. The question in this case is whether local law can also be preempted by state pesticide law. In November 2013, Kauai County in Honolulu, Hawaii, passed Ordinance 960 over the mayor’s veto to regulate pesticides and genetically engineered plants.

The Ordinance required commercial farmers to maintain buffer zones between plots where pesticides were applied and their surrounding properties. Commercial farmers were also required to provide notices before and after applying pesticides as well as file annual reports disclosing the cultivation of genetically engineered crops. Any individual or corporation violating the Ordinance was subject to a civil fine of $10,000 to $25,000 per day, per violation. 

In January 2014, several farming companies sued Kauai County challenging the Ordinance. The plaintiffs contended that the Ordinance was invalid under federal, state, and county law and sought an injunction against its enforcement. The district court granted partial summary judgment and the defendants, the Kauai County and defendant-intervenors moved to appeal. However, the appellate court affirmed the district court’s decision. 

What is necessary for the local law to be preempted by state law? For example, is it necessary that Hawaii law state a local law is invalid if it conflicts with state law? List two more examples. Why do you think state legislators would not want local lawmakers to regulate pesticides?