Supreme Court Weighs New Jersey's Move To Leave Waterfront Commission

By By Christian Wade | The Center Square contributor, The Center Square New Jersey

Mar 3, 2023

(The Center Square) — The U.S. Supreme Court is considering New Jersey's plans to walk away from an anti-racketeering commission created 70 years ago to rout out organized crime and corruption along New York Harbor's docks.

New Jersey wants to leave the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, a bistate panel created in 1953 to combat the mob and corrupt union officials in the International Longshoremen’s Association that controlled the docks -- a fight immortalized by the Marlon Brando movie "On the Waterfront."

For its part, New Jersey argues the commission is no longer relevant, pointing out that much of the cargo activity in New York Harbor has shifted from New York City piers to major terminals in Newark and other cities. They say the regulatory body creates unnecessary red tape that drives up the cost of doing business on the docks.

Gov. Phil Murphy argues New Jersey’s state police could handle criminal investigations and regulatory oversight of the docks to rout out any possible corruption.

But New York says New Jersey can't unilaterally walk away from the pact, and argues the commission remains relevant with organized crime still looking to get a piece of the action.
Last March, New York officials filed a lawsuit asking the Supreme Court to block New Jersey's "illegal" attempt to withdraw and dissolve the commission.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments from both sides of the dispute, the outcome which could decide the fate of the waterfront commission.

During the hearing, several justices were critical of the idea that New Jersey -- as a sovereign state -- couldn't unilaterally walk away from the commission, suggesting New York faces an uphill battle to convince the court to block the move.

Justice Samuel Alito said New York’s argument that New Jersey surrender its sovereign authority perpetually by remaining in the commission would be "an extraordinary thing."

But Chief Justice John Roberts remarked the commission’s dissolution would be complicated by the fact there are buildings, bank accounts, and other financial assets tied to the organization. He said there is more at stake than just ending a compact between the two states.

"Isn’t that a reason that the proper rule may be that you can’t just walk away?" he asked New Jersey's lawyer, Jeremy Feigenbaum. "You say that either party can just walk away, right? But of course, that’s not true."

Lawyers for New York said the commission has helped keep the mob off the docks and brought down dozens of criminals on charges ranging loansharking, money-laundering and extortion.
But the key issue facing the high court is whether New Jersey can unilaterally walk away from the pact, which doesn't specify how members can dissolve the commission.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted the compact was “silent” about withdrawal likely because the two states were "worried about signaling to the mob bosses that they would be leaving."

The high court is expected to issue its decision in the New York V. New Jersey case by July.

The focus of the work of The Center Square New Jersey is state and local-level government and economic reporting that approaches stories with a taxpayer sensibility.