JSX held a media day three years ago, at early on its CEO Alex Wilcox described operating in California. He offered that in most places airports lead with excitement over new service. However, the first question airports ask in California is – who’s your lawyer? – so they can sue you. A perfect example was the effort in Santa Monica to find a sympathetic local judge who might ignore the law and block flights.
Down in Carlsbad, near San Diego, activists and the city are suing to block American Airlines and United Airlines from operating there.
- American began flying Carlsbad – Phoenix twice daily with an Embraer E-175 on February 13, 2025
- United will fly twice daily from Carlsbad to both Denver and San Francisco using Embraer E175s beginning March 30, 2026.
Generally speaking, runways are like public highways and cities don’t get to decide who uses them. And the Airline Deregulation Act pre-empts cities, states, and other entities from regulating airline schedules and service.
The airport had commercial airline service from 1991 to 2015, and has had scheduled charter operations since 2023. However, Carlsbad argues:
- the airport exists under a City-issued land-use permit (a “conditional use permit”) that sets conditions on what the property can be used for, and says expansions and changes need City approval.
- operations are limited to “permitted uses” and any “expansion” beyond what’s allowed requires a permit amendment. The airport’s “General Aviation Basic Transport Airport” designation can’t change without a City-approved permit amendment.
- there’s already a 2021 court judgment (with the same judge) holding the County is bound by that permit and can’t “upgrade” the airport classification (FAA design category) without a permit amendment.
The City’s theory is that the airport can’t changed authorized use of the land without coming back to us first. Meanwhile, the city a NIMBY activist group want California Environmental Quality Act review.
- CEQA applies to discretionary government approvals that may cause physical environmental change. It does not apply to ministerial acts (rubber-stamping with no real judgment). Here, there’s
- approval of a lease with an airline
- rescinding a County policy that capped aircraft size and 70-seat limits to permit 76-seat jets
They don’t really have the legal right to refuse a lease with an airline when there’s room. And the only justification for capping aircraft size is safety, i.e. if the runway isn’t of sufficient length or the terminal setup doesn’t offer sufficient space for the aircraft. But that’s not the case here. Embraer E-175s operate on similar runways without restriction.
A public use airport that’s taken federal money is typically bound by federal “grant assurances” that require the airport to be available on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination. Denying access to the airport would violate federal obligations, and approval is therefore ‘ministerial’.
And even if CEQA applies, it may require analysis of impacts but doesn’t require mitigation where there’s federal pre-emption. It can’t operate as a backdoor limit on what federal law expressly allows. Winning a CEQA argument here may impose a burden on the airport while the flights operate.
The chances that this litigation stops air service at Carlsbad are essentially zero, but if you start flying from a California airport local residents who moved there long after the airport was operating will make it costly and annoying to do so.
(HT: Enilria)
Nah, like it or not, attorneys are customarily the legal representatives for major companies and organizations in transactions and major business relationships. Many things get negotiated through them, unless you’re a peon. So, no, it’s not so the big-bad-blue-state can sue you.
I live in Carlsbad and can see the runway from my house. I’m so happy American and United have returned. There are so many private jets in Carlsbad and these NIMBYs think they can hear the difference?
I hear every takeoff and landing every day. That’s because I live near an airport.
As living in CA. CEQA is used as blackmail and drives up costs for everything here. Buildings. Homes. Airports. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Excellent analysis and elements that the NIMBY’S completely ignore. I use to fly the United routes to LAX frequently back in the day. Can’t wait for them to come back in March. Will make my life a whole lot easier.
I’d love to throw down and make this about the hippie-dippie Californians that, even as a liberal, drive me nuts. Realities is, it’s just a bunch of NIMBYs not being influenced by their politics so much as the perceived disruption to their lives.
Fact is, you bought near an airport in a rapidly growing metropolitan area. If you didn’t consider the possibility commercial service could return you didn’t think things through very well. So many people want what they want and then, as soon as they get it, they want to keep everyone from anything that might impact what they have.
California could write the book on political and government corruption. And the sheep will vote them all in time after time.