Opinion ID: 2083424
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Delegation of governmental functions

Text: The majority suggests that [t]he statutory authorization for private ADRs essentially delegates the quasi-judicial function of the agency to private parties, making actions of those parties in that capacity state action. But the cases relied upon by the majority do not support that proposition. In both Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., 500 U.S. 614, 625, 111 S.Ct. 2077, 114 L.Ed.2d 660 (1991) and Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649, 660, 64 S.Ct. 757, 88 L.Ed. 987 (1944), the government had delegated to a private party the power to perform an essential governmental function. Edmonson dealt with the use of peremptory challenges to assist in the selection of a jury in a civil trial. 500 U.S. at 623-24, 111 S.Ct. 2077. The Court noted that a jury is a quintessential governmental body, having no attributes of a private actor. Id. at 624, 111 S.Ct. 2077. Smith dealt with the use of primary elections to select nominees for the general election. 321 U.S. at 652-53, 64 S.Ct. 757. The Court observed that [p]rimary elections are conducted by the [political] party under state statutory authority and extensive state regulation, which makes the political party an agency of the state in so far as it determines the participants in a primary election. 321 U.S. at 663, 64 S.Ct. 757. In contrast, section 176.1812 does not authorize private parties to perform an essential governmental function. Instead, it authorizes private parties to opt out of the governmental process. This, of course, is why arbitration is called alternative dispute resolution  it does not use the governmental system (in this case, the executive branch quasi-judicial system) but provides a private alternative. The resolution of a private dispute is a role that the government will perform when the parties have not agreed otherwise, but it is not an essential governmental function that should be imposed on parties that have agreed to an alternative mechanism. To the contrary, this court has actively encouraged the use of ADR mechanisms and they are widely used to resolve private disputes of all kinds.