SPOKANE, Wash. (Legal Newsline) – The Washington attorney general’s attempt to force Greyhound from banning border patrol officers from its buses is preempted by federal law, the company recently said.
On June 12, Greyhound filed a motion to dismiss Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s April lawsuit that claims the company violated the state’s Consumer Protection Act and Washington Law Against Discrimination.
Ferguson is worried U.S. Customs & Border Protection agents are checking up on minorities – especially Latinos – when they use Greyhound’s buses and facilities in Spokane.
“Here, deeming Greyhound’s accession to CBP demands to be unlawful would prevent it from complying with orders that (federal law) permits, and would obstruct the use of federal authority Congress provided,” the motion says.
“To the extent the duty Plaintiff seeks to impose on Greyhound thwarts federal objectives, it is preempted.”
Ferguson says Greyhound is allowing CBP agents to perform warrantless sweeps and fails to inform customers they will be likely subjected to the searches. Greyhound counters it must comply with CBP’s wishes.
“Greyhound must reform its practices, and warn customers of the risk they face of being interrogated by immigration agents without cause,” Ferguson said. “Greyhound’s customers have suffered for far too long because of the company’s indifference. Greyhound’s recent public reversal isn’t enough to erase the negative impact of its conduct.”
Greyhound says Ferguson’s claims should be thrown out, adding that he neglected to join CBP as a necessary party. If the complaint is not dismissed at this stage, CBP should be added as a defendant, the company says.
“Resolution of this controversy without CBP’s joinder would subject Greyhound to inconsistent obligations,” the motion says.
“For example, even if Greyhound were compelled by Plaintiff’s requested injunction to bar CBP agents from (1) boarding and searching its buses at the Spokane Intermodal Center without a warrant or consent or reasonable suspicion, and (2) accessing its non-public property there in order to board and search its buses, Greyhound would still be subject to demands by CBP agents to allow them to do so pursuant to Section 1357 because CBP would not be bound by the injunction.”