Next step could be U.S. Supreme Court
If Santa Monica wants to ban ATM fees, it’s going to have to convince the U.S. Supreme Court.
A three judge panel in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Federal Appeals in San Francisco ruled Friday that the case against Santa Monica’s ban on ATM fees is airtight and not worth hearing again.
“The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing... and no active judge has requested a vote on whether to re-hear the matter,” wrote Judge Joseph T. Sneed in the court’s opinion.
“The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing... and no active judge has requested a vote on whether to re-hear the matter.” — — JOSEPH T. SNEED 9th U.S. Circuit Court judge
Santa Monica attorneys had asked for their case to be heard before a panel of 11 federal judges in hopes the larger panel would overturn a previous federal appeals court decision.
However, the same three judges who overturned ATM laws in Santa Monica and San Francisco in October also turned down the city’s request for the new hearing.
The court of appeals, in upholding an earlier judge’s ruling, said only the federal government, not city councils or local voters, may create such ATM fee regulations.
Federal banking regulations adopted by Congress allow banks to charge fees for ATM usage, the court said in its opinion. That being the case, the Santa Monica City Council and San Francisco voters had no authority to approve identical laws in 1999 banning banks from charging ATM fees to customers who are not members of that bank.
“We find that the ordinances are pre-empted by federal law and regulations and thus invalid,” Sneed wrote.
No one from the Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office was available for comment Friday.
The court’s decision leaves the city with the U.S. Supreme Court as the last place to take its case. It’s unclear yet, after spending thousands of dollars on attorneys’ fees, whether the city will take the case to the top.
Santa Monica was the first city in California to take on the banking industry by banning what officials — and many consumers — regard as a “double charge.”
City Councilman Kevin McKeown brought the issue to the forefront in October
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on December 21, 2002. Read the original PDF.