| No search history |
Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

In the case of Concrete Pipe and Products of California, Inc. v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust for Southern California (1992), the Supreme Court ruled on issues related to pension fund withdrawal liability under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The court held that ERISA's provisions did not violate due process rights nor constitute a taking without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment. The company, Concrete Pipe, had withdrawn from a multiemployer pension plan and was assessed with withdrawal liability by Construction Laborers Pension Trust. Concrete Pipe challenged this assessment arguing it violated their constitutional rights but both district court and appellate court rejected these claims leading to appeal in Supreme Court. In its ruling, the Supreme Court affirmed lower courts' decisions stating that ERISA’s mandatory arbitration procedure provided sufficient opportunity for employers to challenge assessments thereby ensuring procedural due process; also noting that since no property was taken as part of this transaction there were no grounds for a claim based on unconstitutional takings.
The dissenting opinion in the case of Concrete Pipe and Products of California, Inc. v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust for Southern California argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings regarding employer liability under ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act). The dissent believed that the Court had wrongly interpreted "withdrawal liability" as a fixed debt rather than a contingent one, which would only be due if certain events occurred. They also disagreed with how the Court applied constitutional scrutiny to this issue, arguing it should have used rational basis review instead of heightened scrutiny because economic legislation is involved. Furthermore, they contended that even if heightened scrutiny were appropriate, withdrawal liability still satisfies such standard since it serves important governmental objectives and is closely tailored to achieve them.