Document: 406 U.S. 109 92 S.Ct. 1396 31 L.Ed.2d 727 State of WASHINGTON et al., Plaintiffs,v.GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION al. No. 45, Orig. Argued Feb. 28, 29, 1972. Decided April 24, Syllabus Eighteen States have filed a motion for leave to file bill complaint against the Nation's four major automobile manufacturers and their trade association, alleging conspiracy in violation federal antitrust laws, common-law restraint restrain development motor vehicle air pollution control equipment, public nuisance state common law. Those seek an injunction, inter alia, requiring defendants accelerate research program produce effective devices pollution-free engines install anti-pollution equipment all vehicles they manufactured during alleged conspiracy. Held: Though Court has original but not exclusive jurisdiction, it exercises discretion avoid impairing its ability administer appellate docket. In view nature relief requested availability district courts as alternative forum, declines assume jurisdiction. As matter law well practical necessity, remedies must be considered context local situations, making advisable that this controversy resolved appropriate courts. Pp. 113—116. Motions North Dakota West Virginia joined parties plaintiff granted. Motion denied remitted other forum. Fredric C. Tausend, Seattle, Wash., plaintiffs. Lloyd N. Cutler, Washington, D.C., defendants. [Arguments from counsel pages 110-111 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered opinion Court. 1 Plaintiffs are 18 who, by complaint, involve Court's jurisdiction under Art. III, § 2, cl. Constitution.1 Named association. 2 allege among equipment. They began early 1953 was concealed until January 1969. Count I proposed charges laws. II independently Sherman Clayton Acts.2 prayer relief, plaintiffs injunction undertake 'an accelerated spending, designed fully device or and/or free engine at earliest feasible date' also ordering standard future which manufacture. Other prophylactic is sought. 3 The plainly presents important questions vital national importance. See, e.g., Hearings before Subcommittee on Air Water Pollution Senate Committee Public Works, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967). Our over cannot disputed. Georgia v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 324 439, 65 716, 89 L.Ed. 1051; Tennessee Copper 206 230, 27 618, 51 1038. For reasons will appear, however, we deny complaint. 4 gravamen plaintiffs' allegations horizontal impede automotive devices. See generally L. Jaffe & Tribe, Environmental Protection 141—180 (1971). It argued facts support statutory claims identical could elicited Special Master appointed court judge, resort would place burden time resources substantially greater than when hear case direct appeal Expediting Act, 32 Stat. 823, amended, 15 U.S.C. 29. And sheer number invoke our reason enough us grant file.3 5 breadth constitutional dictates able exercise cases jurisdictional head, lest docket impaired. Massachusetts Missouri, 308 1, 19, 60 39, 43, 84 3; Ohio Wyandotte Chemicals Corp., 401 493, 497—499, 91 1005, 1009—1010, 28 256; H. Hart Wechsler, Federal Courts System 258—260 (1953); Woods Reed, Supreme Interstate Quality: Some Notes Case, 12 Ariz.L.Rev. 691; Note, 11 Stan.L.Rev. 665, 694—700. supra, U.S., 18—19, S.Ct., where sought order collect tax claim, said: 6 'In so truly fulfill purpose only look interest complaining State—the essential quality right asserted—but inquire whether recourse . necessary State's protection. To open actions recover taxes claimed payable citizens States, absence showing necessity such intervention, regarded compelling might seriously interfere with discharge duty deciding controversies appropriately brought it.' 7 By same token, conclude forum suggest remit resolution customary remedy may necessary, if made out, argues taking 8 is, course, one most notorious types modern experience. Congress not, found uniform, nationwide solution aspects problem and, indeed, declared 'that prevention source primary responsibility government.' 81 485, 42 1857(a)(3). sure, largely pre-empted field regard 'emissions new vehicles,' 1857f—6a(a); Fed.Reg. 5170 (1966); fuels fuel additives, 1699, s 1857f-6c(c)(4). Currie, Motor Vehicle Pollution: Authority Pre-emption, 68 Mich.L.Rev. 1083 (1970); Hill, Politics Interest Pressure Groups, 10 37, 44—45 (1968); Stevens, System: Responses Felt Necessities, 22 Hastings L.J. 661, 674—676 far emissions airplanes concerned, §§ 1857f—9 1857f—12. So factories, incinerators, stationary implicated, broad extent relate here.4 passim; Comment, 58 Calif.L.Rev. 1474 (1970). But certain instances, as, example, secondary ambient standards been established,5 1857c—4 1857c—5, 'hazardous pollutant(s)' defined, 1857c—7, there pre-emption. 1857c—8 seq. Moreover, geophysical characteristics define regional airsheds often significant considerations determining steps abate pollution. Sess., 130 (1967); Coons, Government Structure, 48, 60—64 (1968). Thus, measures adequate deal city San Francisco, grossly inadequate Phoenix, geographical meteorological conditions trap aerosols particulates. 9 corrective pollution, therefore, necessarily localized situations.6 We causes should heard courts.7 motions without prejudice ordered. POWELL took no part consideration decision these motions. 13 join denied. Fifteenth originally moved subsequently granted Idaho intervene plaintiff. 403 949, 2272, 29 862. today's A third count charged 'a contrary policy Plaintiff (and) Leave File Bill Complaint 12. memorandum 1972, struck complaint; Idaho, intervenor, did motion. light disposition Counts Idaho's solely III fortiori. Should any desire renew District Court, do today Illinois City Milwaukee, 91, 1385, 712. addition plaintiffs, 16 New York brief amicus curiae supporting Because emission apply vehicles, retain residual power used vehicles. citizens, governments initiate enforce compliance rights. 1857h—2. National those 'which judgment Administrator (of Agency) requisite protect health ..' 1857c—4(b)(1). Secondary 'requisite welfare,' 1857c—4(b)(2), 'includes, limited to, effects soils, water, crops, vegetation, manmade materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility, climate, damage deterioration property, hazards transportation, economic values personal comfort well-being.' 1857h(h). implementation plans standards, see 1857c—5. Rules regulations setting promulgated Agency. 36 22384 recognition fact directed Agency 'designate region interstate area intrastate he deems attainment maintenance standards.' 1857c—2(c). Multi-district litigation apparently involving factual presented here consolidated Central California pretrial proceedings already way. re Control Equipment, 311 F.Supp. 1349 (Jud.Panel Multidist.Lit.1970).

Category: 7