43 J. Air L. & Com. 753 (1977)
Aircraft Noise: Federal Pre-Emption of Local Control, Concorde and Other Recent Cases; Muss, Joshua A.

handle is hein.journals/jalc43 and id is 775 raw text is: Comments,

AIRCRAFT NOISE: FEDERAL
PRE-EMPTION OF LOCAL CONTROL, CONCORDE
AND OTHER RECENT CASES
JOSHUA A. Muss
The efforts of British Airways Board (British Airways) and
Compagnie Nationale Air France (Air France) to secure Ameri-
can landing rights for Concorde, their supersonic airliner, have
produced a controversy of unexpected proportion. The disputes
engendered have threatened to affect the international relationships
of the United States and have put in issue principles of federalism
as related to the locus of authority to regulate aircraft noise emis-
sions. The focus of this controversy has been the attempt to secure
landing rights for Concorde at John F. Kennedy International
Airport (JFK) as access port to the lucrative New York-Paris/
London market. These efforts resulted in 18 months of extensive
litigation which is likely to be resolved only by the United States
Supreme Court.
The central legal issue raised by the Concorde question concerns
whether the federal government has pre-empted the authority of
airport proprietors to regulate noise emission levels for aircraft using
their facilities. Since 1975, this issue has been litigated in four
cases with the courts arriving at differing conclusions.1 An exami-
nation of the facts and legal precedents relating to the pre-emption
question raised by Concorde is the best means of clarifying the
issues and giving insight into their ultimate resolution. In order to
separate the issues from the emotional volatility that has attached
to Concorde it is necessary to examine the historical background
of Concorde, the federal legislative history of the regulation of
' British Airways Bd. v. Port Auth. of N.Y., 558 F.2d 75 (2d Cir. 1977);
National Av. v. City of Haywood, 418 F. Supp. 417 (N.D. Cal. 1976); Air
Transp. Ass'n of Amer. v. Crotti, 389 F. Supp. 58 (N.D. Cal. 1975); and San
Diego Unified Port Dist. v. Superior Court, 67 Cal. App. 3d 361, 136 Cal. Rptr.
557 (Ct. App.), cert. denied, 98 S.Ct. 184 (1977).

Purchase Short-Term Access to HeinOnline

Prices starting as low as $29.95

Already a Subscriber?

What Is HeinOnline?

Learn More About the Law Journal Library (pdf)

We also offer annual subscriptions to universities, colleges, law firms, organizations, and other institutions. To request a quote please visit http://home.heinonline.org/subscriptions/request-a-quote/

Please note: the content in the Law Journal Library is constantly changing and some content has restrictions as required per the license. Therefore, please review the available content via the following link to ensure the material you wish to access is included in the database. For a complete list of content included in the Law Journal Library, please view http://www.heinonline.org/HOL/CSV.csv?index=journals&collection=journals