State Law Cannot Prohibit Arbitration Agreements

The Supreme Court has long held that arbitration is not appropriate even if it results in a loss of substantive customary law or legal rights. A Fourth Circuit decision in May 2017 shows how effective this line of attack can be. NCLC`s Model State Consumer and Employment Justice Enforcement Act contains ten separate titles, each containing a language that a state can adopt to limit the impact of arbitration agreements. The Model Law also contains comments explaining why the FAA`s decision to purchase VOR should not apply to these ten titles: the Blair decision has obvious significance for consumers who use California law that provides for public injunctions. Individuals can apply for such relief, whether they are brought to justice or forced into arbitration.