SCOTUS rules in favor of New Jersey after New York sues over Waterfront Commission

New Jersey got a W from the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday.

The high court unanimously ruled in favor of the Garden State after it was sued by New York for attempting to withdraw from the Waterfront Commission.

Gov. Phil Murphy issued a statement Tuesday that he was thrilled about the court's ruling.

"Since the first hours of our time in office, my administration has steadfastly pursued the dissolution of the Waterfront Commission because it was the right thing to do," Murphy said. "For many years, frustration over the Commission’s operations has been building. I am proud that after a five-year battle in the federal courts, where my administration used every legal tool at our disposal, New Jersey’s sovereign right to govern our ports has been vindicated."

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and New York Attorney General Letitia James issued a joint statement that they are disappointed by the decision.

"For decades, the Waterfront Commission has been a vital law enforcement agency, protecting essential industries at the port and cracking down on organized crime. We will continue to do everything in our power to combat corruption and crime, protect the health of our economy, and ensure the safety of New Yorkers.”

The Waterfront Commission was created in 1953 — after years of mob influence and theft at the docks, as depicted in the film "On the Waterfront," starring Marlon Brando — through a compact that did not include language about how and when to terminate the commission.

For 70 years, a commissioner from each state has governed the organization, which included a small staff who vetted union labor hires and investigated suspected criminal activity at the docks.

New Jersey began the process of trying to leave the commission in 2018, arguing that the commission's work was no longer needed, that it was outdated and unable to handle 21st-century security challenges, that it impeded hiring, and that the New Jersey State Police could handle vetting and police work required on docks in the state. New York argued that criminals still attempt to influence hiring and operations at the ports and that the two states had to agree on the terms of withdrawal.

Notably, the International Longshoremen's Association has been a longtime campaign contributor to New Jersey political candidates. Most recently, reporting from NorthJersey.com uncovered that the union's "Committee on Political Education" donated $100,000 in June 2022 to a dark money nonprofit tied to Murphy and $40,000 before that.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who penned the opinion for the Supreme Court, wrote that the arguments presented by New York were unpersuasive and that New Jersey has the sovereign authority in this case to withdraw from the commission.

"Given that the States did not intend for the agreement to be perpetual, it would not make much sense to conclude that each State implicitly conferred on the other a perpetual veto of withdrawal," Kavanaugh wrote.

During oral arguments last month, it seemed clear the justices were unconvinced by New York's points and spent the latter half of the arguments seeking New Jersey's input on how to craft an opinion in their favor.

Judith Vale, New York's deputy solicitor general, argued on behalf of the Empire State. Jeremy Feigenbaum, the New Jersey solicitor general, argued for New Jersey. The U.S. Department of Justice filed court documents that sided with New Jersey and made its case in front of the justices last month, too.

Murphy said in his statement, "We look forward to working with New York to ensure a swift and orderly dissolution of the Commission in a way that ensures security and uninterrupted business at New Jersey’s ports."

This article originally appeared on NorthJersey.com: Waterfront Commission ruling by SCOTUS lets NJ leave agency