Automakers Sue To Kill Maine's Hugely Popular 'Right To Repair' Law (techdirt.com) 18
Maine's overwhelmingly popular right-to-repair law is under attack by automakers through lawsuits and lobbying efforts aimed at weakening or delaying enforcement. While the law remains in limbo due to industry influence and legal challenges, broader enforcement issues persist across multiple states, with corporations often ignoring right-to-repair laws despite their legal passage. Techdirt reports: A little over a year ago, Maine residents voted overwhelmingly (83 percent) to pass a new state right to repair law designed to make auto repairs easier and more affordable. More specifically, the law requires that automakers standardize on-board diagnostic systems and provide remote access to those systems and mechanical data to consumers and third-party independent repair shops. But as we've seen with other states that have passed right to reform laws (most notably New York), passing the law isn't the end of the story. Corporate lobbyists have had great success not just watering these laws down before passage, but after voters approve them. They've also been swarmed by coordinated industry lawsuits and falsehood-spewing attacks.
Maine's popular right to repair law just took effect after a year of hashing out the fine details, but the bill's still being changed as the state tries to sort out enforcement. Large automakers have been looming over that process to try and weaken the law. But the Alliance For Automotive Innovation also just filed a new lawsuit saying the law isn't fully cooked and therefore violates the law: "This is an example of putting the cart before the horse. Before automakers can comply, the law requires the attorney general to first establish an 'independent entity' to securely administer access to vehicle data. The independent entity hasn't been established. That's not in dispute. Compliance with the law right now is not possible."
Maine's popular right to repair law just took effect after a year of hashing out the fine details, but the bill's still being changed as the state tries to sort out enforcement. Large automakers have been looming over that process to try and weaken the law. But the Alliance For Automotive Innovation also just filed a new lawsuit saying the law isn't fully cooked and therefore violates the law: "This is an example of putting the cart before the horse. Before automakers can comply, the law requires the attorney general to first establish an 'independent entity' to securely administer access to vehicle data. The independent entity hasn't been established. That's not in dispute. Compliance with the law right now is not possible."
For future bills controlling corporations (Score:5, Interesting)
You need to add a clause to these bills re-asserting state sovereign immunity and withdrawing consent of the government to be sued by corporations the law applies to. The companies notoriously abuse the court system to obstruct.
On most matters states are immune to being sued, so I am not sure why this is tolerated to allow companies to push back against regulations like so. Write a statute in consumer protection laws like this restoring the government's Immunity so that the courts cannot be used to obstruct implementation.
Re:For future bills controlling corporations (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyone can challenge the constitutionality of a law; you can't legislate your way around that.
But, I think that if a law is approved by a majority of voters, and it is challenged by corporations (not private individuals) and the law is upheld as constitutional... then the corporations should be on the hook for 10x the legal fees spent to defend the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Learn to read.
Re:For future bills controlling corporations (Score:4, Insightful)
On most matters states are immune to being sued, so I am not sure why this is tolerated to allow companies to push back against regulations like so.
Companies were given human rights on the back of a rights bill intended for black folk in America in the 1950s.
The companies notoriously abuse the court system to obstruct.
This is exactly correct, how corporation use their ill gotten rights thus subverting the intent of a bill designed to apply to actual human beings.
You need to add a clause to these bills re-asserting state sovereign immunity and withdrawing consent of the government to be sued by corporations the law applies to.
Simply remove their Limited liability protections under law and allow the impact of any legal action against the company to affect the shareholders. Exposing them to their true liability would disincentivize these behaviors.
Write a statute in consumer protection laws like this restoring the government's Immunity so that the courts cannot be used to obstruct implementation.
Simpler to remove their ability to expand their portfolio and change their charter. If they are going to gouge the consumers they serve then they don't have any right to use those techniques to gouge consumers in other markets.
Re: For future bills controlling corporations (Score:3)
Such a radical law! (Score:4, Funny)
People actually reparing their own cars! It is practically Communism! and has never happened before in the US!
Plutos gotta (Score:2)
...crat
Important lesson (Score:5, Insightful)
If corporations or the rich protest against a law, it's usually a good law.
They will win too (Score:5, Interesting)
While we were distracted by that nonsense along with the usual tribalism that divides the working class the upper class was busy taking control of our judicial system. I don't think there's anyone here who's paying any attention who wouldn't say the supreme Court isn't openly corrupt. I mean Clarence Thomas has a luxury motor coach bought for him by a billionaire and every Republican on that court has gone on multimillion-dollar vacations paid for by the upper class.
I don't see any sign of us learning either. Exit polls from 2024 showed moral panics were a major concern for voters.
Re: (Score:2)
While moral panics contain the inevitable "I'm a victim" and "world owes me" self-pity, the behaviour is closer to the blind loyalty of a cult. That is, moral panics are a band-wagon, and everyone wants 15 minutes of fame (or something similar). Democracy and 'small government' means, once a corporation/oligarch generates a critical mass of sympathizers, the politicians will comply.
In the recent murder of an insurance CEO that didn't occur, even after weeks of propaganda.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't redefine a term to make it seem more-acceptable when your chosen faction intends to pack courts in the future.
Packing a court means appointing more seats to a judicial panel so as to fill them with ideologically-aligned judges without waiting for vacancies. It does not mean appointing an ideologically-aligned judge to a vacant seat. When you win an election, you may gain the power to appoint judges as you see fit, assuming the office carries that responsibility. Packing a court undermines the wi
Weapons of Mass Distraction. (Score:2)
While we were distracted by that nonsense along with the usual tribalism that divides the working class the upper class was busy taking control of our judicial system. I don't think there's anyone here who's paying any attention who wouldn't say the supreme Court isn't openly corrupt. I mean Clarence Thomas has a luxury motor coach bought for him by a billionaire and every Republican on that court has gone on multimillion-dollar vacations paid for by the upper class.
Really? Only Republicans go on vacations paid for by the upper class? After Epstein and Diddy we are supposed to believe that left-leaning Democrats serving that court aren’t just as corrupt? At this point Hunter could be sold as a brand of fire starter for BBQ grills because there’s that much smoke.
C’mon now. If you’re going to make a valid point about the Weapons of Mass Distraction abused in Government, at least have the guts to be honest about how bi-partisan the problem of c