In this prior post, we looked at a Kentucky case questioning the constitutionality of the Certificate of Necessity requirement for new moving companies under Kentucky law. Last month, a federal judge held that this requirement was unconstitutional because it allowed the government to favor certain companies over other companies solely for anti-competitive purposes.
This case drew national attention, including a special report on John Stossel's Fox Business television show. As discussed in this post by one of the victorious attorneys in the Kentucky case on the popular legal blog The Volokh Conspiracy, the facts and the holding of this case are quite similar to cases brought in several other states in which the necessity of the certification process was questioned, especially considering that a substantial majority of the protests ever brought in connection with such an application have been brought by moving companies already in the applicant's marketplace expressing concern that the issuance of the certificate would negatively impact their business due to the increase in competition that would result.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
