Today, ERIC filed a letter pursuant to Rule 28(j), requesting that the Ninth Circuit bring its ERISA preemption jurisprudence in line with other circuits and hold that the inclusion of a non-ERISA option in a law that directly regulates ERISA plans does not avoid ERISA preemption.
The letter was needed due to a recent decision by the Ninth Circuit in Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Ass’n v. California Secure Choice Retirement SavingsProgram that does not align with other circuits. It holds that ERISA does not preempt a California law requiring private employers to assist employees and the state with the automatic enrollment of employees into CalSavers, a state-managed individual retirement account program.
ERIC believes the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Jarvis supports the need to address the creativity with which states and localities are devising options that avoid characterization as ERISA plans.
For more information on ERIC’s lawsuit, click here.