Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/524bv.pdf
Page Number: 604

524US2

Unit: $U94

[09-11-00 13:26:40] PAGES PGT: OPLG

Cite as: 524 U. S. 498 (1998)

559

Breyer, J., dissenting

miners. Congress might have assessed all
those who
now use coal, or the taxpayer, in order to pay for those re-
tired coal miners’ health beneﬁts. But Congress, instead,
imposed this liability on Eastern. Coal Industry Retiree
Health Beneﬁt Act of 1992 (Coal Act), 26 U. S. C. §§ 9701–
9722 (1994 ed. and Supp. II). The “fairness” question is,
why Eastern?

The answer cannot lie in a contractual promise to pay, for
Eastern made no such contractual promise. Nor did East-
ern participate in any beneﬁt plan that made such a contrac-
tual promise, prior to its departure from the coal industry in
1965. But, as Justice Stevens points out, this case is not
It is a constitutional
a civil law suit for breach of contract.
challenge to Congress’ decision to assess a new future liabil-
ity on the basis of an old employment relationship. Ante, at
551–552, n. 3 (dissenting opinion). Unless it is fundamen-
tally unfair and unjust, in terms of Eastern’s reasonable reli-
ance and settled expectations, to impose that liability, the
Coal Act’s “reachback” provision meets that challenge. See
Connolly, 475 U. S., at 227; Concrete Pipe, 508 U. S., at
645–646.

I believe several features of this case demonstrate that the
relationship between Eastern and the payments demanded
by the Coal Act is special enough to pass the Constitution’s
fundamental fairness test. That is, even though Eastern
left the coal industry in 1965, the historical circumstances,
taken together, prevent Eastern from showing that the Coal
Act’s “reachback” liability provision so frustrates Eastern’s
reasonable settled expectations as to impose an unconstitu-
tional liability. Cf. Penn Central, 438 U. S., at 127–128.

For one thing, the liability that the statute imposes upon
Eastern extends only to miners whom Eastern itself em-
ployed. See 26 U. S. C. § 9706(a) (imposing “reachback” lia-
bility only where no presently operating coal ﬁrm which rati-
ﬁed 1978 or subsequent bargaining agreement ever employed
the retiree, and Eastern employed the retiree longer than