Complaint Against All Defendants Filed by Association of American Railroads. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons Doee, # 3 Summons Jackson)(Dupree, Thomas)
INTRODUCTION
1Congress has long exercised broad regulatory authority over rail transportation. The ICC Termination Act (“ICCTA”) vests the federal government with “exclusive” jurisdiction over “transportation by rail carriers,” and preempts state legislation that would manage, govern, or discriminate against rail transportation. 49 U.S.C. § 10501(b). Similarly, the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (“HMTA”) prohibits States from imposing fees on rail shipments of hazardous materials unless the fee is “fair”—meaning the fee must be imposed equally on all competitive modes of transportation.
2In violation of this comprehensive federal scheme, the District of Columbia’s Department of Energy and Environment (the “Department”) has issued a Rule imposing a “fee” on trains that enter or exit the District (the “Border Fee”). The Rule imposes a Border Fee of sixty cents ($0.60) for each railroad car that enters the District. It also imposes a Border Fee of sixty cents ($0.60) for each railroad car that exits the District. And it imposes a Border Fee of sixty cents ($0.60) for each railroad car that transits through the District without stopping. See Department of Energy and Environment, Notice of Final Rulemaking, Railroad Carrier Fees, 72 DCR 13177 (Nov. 28, 2025).
3The Border Fee is uniquely imposed on railroads. Other competing modes of transportation—such as trucks—are not required to pay the Border Fee. The funds generated from the Border Fee are placed in the District of Columbia’s Rail Safety and Security Fund and used to administer the District’s rail safety and security program.
4The Border Fee is preempted by federal law. The Border Fee is preempted by ICCTA because it manages and governs rail transportation and discriminates against railroads. The Border Fee is also preempted by the HMTA because the charge is not “fair,” as the statute requires: It is assessed only against railroads and not against competing modes of transportation.
5The Border Fee also violates the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. It assesses a charge at the very moment a train engages in interstate commerce by requiring a payment for every border crossing. The Border Fee is a textbook example of a law that discriminates against and penalizes interstate commerce.
6Finally, the Border Fee violates the D.C. Administrative Procedure Act (DCAPA). The Rule and the Border Fee are arbitrary and capricious because the Department did not offer a reasoned explanation for how it determined the amount, scope, and applicability of the fee.
7The Court should hold and declare the Rule preempted by ICCTA and/or the HMTA, invalid under the Commerce Clause, and unlawful under the DCAPA. The Court should enjoin Defendants from implementing or enforcing the Rule and vacate the Rule in its entirety.
PARTIES
8Plaintiff Association of American Railroads is a nonprofit industry association whose members include all of the Class I freight railroads (North America’s largest freight railroads), smaller freight railroads, and passenger and commuter railroads. AAR’s members operate approximately 83 percent of the line-haul mileage, employ 95 percent of the workers, and account for 97 percent of the freight revenues of all railroads in the United States. AAR and its members are committed to operating the safest, most efficient, cost-effective, and environmentally sound freight rail transportation system in the world. AAR represents its member railroads in proceedings before Congress, administrative agencies, and the courts in matters of common interest, such as the issues involved in this lawsuit. AAR members, including CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), operate in the District of Columbia.
9Defendant Department of Energy and Environment (the “Department”) is an agency of Defendant District of Columbia. The Department issued the Rule and collects the Border Fee.
10Defendant Richard Jackson is the Director of the District of Columbia Department of Energy and Environment, the Department that issued the Rule and collects the Border Fee. He is sued in his official capacity.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
11This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because this case arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, and raises substantial questions of federal law, including whether federal law preempts the Rule. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 1367 to consider AAR’s DCAPA claim because that claim arises from the same common nucleus of operative fact as AAR’s federal claims.
12This Court may declare the legal rights and obligations of the parties in this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202 because this action presents an actual controversy within the Court’s jurisdiction.
13This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because they are domiciled in the District of Columbia.
14Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), because all Defendants reside in this District and because a substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to AAR’s claims occurred in this District.
15AAR has associational standing to bring this suit on behalf of its members because several of those members, including CSXT, are directly and adversely affected by the Rule and thus would have standing to sue in their own right. The interests that AAR seeks to protect through this lawsuit are germane to the organization’s purpose, and neither the claims asserted nor the relief requested requires an individual member of AAR to participate in this suit.
FACTS
A.
Railroad Operations in the District of Columbia
16AAR’s freight railroad members play a crucial role in the national and global economies, transporting vital commodities and other goods to industry, businesses, and consumers. AAR’s members are common carriers and, as such, are required under federal law to provide shippers with “transportation . . . on reasonable request.” 49 U.S.C. § 11101(a).
17Freight railroads are committed to operating in a safe and environmentally sustainable manner. Railroads are the safest form of surface transportation, the most fuel- efficient mode of freight transportation on land, and the safest above-the-ground mode of transportation for hazardous materials.
18Freight railroads operate highly sophisticated and interconnected rail networks. For example, not only do AAR’s members maintain their own expansive route networks, but their networks also connect to hundreds of short-line and other railroads as well as ports, intermodal terminals, rail-truck transfer facilities, industrial sites and
Read the full filing
You’re reading pages 1–5 of 17. Register free to read the complete 17-page transcript on this page.
Register free to continue reading →
These are public U.S. federal court records, available free from PACER and the court. Registration unlocks our full on-page transcript — a convenience service.
advertisement
Public U.S. federal court record (district court docket 73114816, document 1). Source via the RECAP Archive (Free Law Project). The same record is available from PACER. Informational only — not legal advice.