Court Opinion

ID: 9691058
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 20:06:27.672591+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:09.795911
License: Public Domain

CONCURRING OPINION
RONALD R. HOLLIGER, Judge,
concurs in a separate opinion.
I concur in the majority opinion, which necessarily and accurately follows U.S. Supreme Court precedent in the interpretation of the Federal Arbitration Act. It is a discomforting concurrence, however, to all those who have historically seen in the various states a residual power to regulate activities within their own states according to their own policies and principles of law. The all encompassing interpretation and application of the Federal Arbitration Act through the Commerce Clause is in the process of engulfing the original concept of federalism upon which our system of government was founded. At oral argument, counsel for the bank stated that there would be some situations that would not be potentially covered by federal rather than state law regarding arbitration. Yet he couldn’t think of any. Nor can I.