As counsel to older pilots around the country challenging the Age 60 Rule, I have been litigating the FAA’s orders forcing hundreds of experienced pilots into retirement upon turning 60 years old. The recent enactment of the Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act merely replaced one Age 60 regulatory rule with an even more arbitrary and capricious Age 60 statutory rule. Below is our contesting the enforceability of the act in our ten pending appellate cases.
Congress finally acted on the long-standing controversy in passing the Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act, Pub. L. No. 110-135, 121 Stat. 1450 (2007), which President Bush signed on December 13, 2007. This law, however, replaced the age discriminatory rule with a series of age-discriminatory provisions barring benefits and procedural rights. The government now seeks to have all of the above captioned cases dismissed on the basis of the Act. Thus, according to the government, even if the pilots were entitled to relief in their challenge of the denial of waiver under the Age 60 rule, they are now barred from challenging the Act that replaced the rule.
For the most recent filing, click here
I don’t want the guy flying my kids at 30,000 feet at the end of his lifeline….60 is old enough.
… “The recent enactment of the Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act merely replaced one Age 60 regulatory rule with an even more arbitrary and capricious Age 60 statutory rule.”.
Is it important to distinguish between regulatory and statutory for purposes of your brief?
To accentuate the irony, I would encourage a companion amicus arguing the obvious misnomer of the (Un)Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act, Pub. L. No. 110-135, 121 Stat. 1450 (2007) and proposing yet another rule change – as it’s pretty clear it was not fully understood before the vote, in my opinion
Good luck, JT.
Great post Patty C.
Did you notice our Host was too modest to mention that it was he who successfully litigated Foretich v U.S. on which the bill of attainder claim is based?
Just when we think we have seen the depths of the movement to cut off access to the courts and remedies, than something like this appears.
Definitely a due process claim here.
He’s a busy man. And with all the arguments in Petitioners’ favor, in this case, he can try being modest if he wants, but that doesn’t mean he’ll get away with it.
http://jonathanturley.org/2007/11/20/elizabeth-morgan-act-and-legislating-family-values/
I don’t know how many cases on appeal he has going and there’s not a single one that I disagree with. Do you know the count?
Could it be that there might be a 6-3 or 7-2 majority for JT on the high court if it comes to that? And does DCA look at that kind of thing in their calculus? I do not know.
I still don’t know how you do it.
msnbcbser:
“I don’t want the guy flying my kids at 30,000 feet at the end of his lifeline….60 is old enough.”
Yeah and I don’t want this old guy McCain “flying” our country around while in his 70′s for 4 years either.