Appeals Court Upholds Dismissal Of MD Wal-Mart Law

The anti-Wal-Mart jihad continues to unravel. A Federal appeals court has upheld the dismissal of Maryland's law that attempted to force Wal-Mart into paying additional money for health care.

Maryland's law would have required non-governmental employers with 10,000 or more workers to spend at least 8 percent of payroll on health care or pay the difference in taxes. The lower court ruled that the state law was pre-empted by the 1974 Employee Retirement Income Security Act, or ERISA.

The measure was aimed at Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart Stores Inc., which has been under attack by critics who say that its inadequate health care benefits is forcing some employees to use state-funded plans.

"Were we to approve Maryland's enactment solely for its noble purpose, we would be leading a charge against the foundational policy of ERISA, and surely other states and local governments would follow," the ruling by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reads. "As sensitive as we are to the right of Maryland and other states to enact laws of their own choosing, we are also bound to enforce ERISA as the 'supreme law of the land.'"

Since the recent poll that showed that the Wal-Mart jihad was a political loser for the Democrats, it has been very, very quiet on the political trail, hasn't it? Haven't been hearing a lot of bloviating about it from presidential hopefuls. Maybe this will be the whimper that ends the campaign. Too bad in a way. It would have been amusing watching the hopefuls ticking off a lot of voters.