The following is a history of significant events related to the myth:
1788: The United States Constitution is adopted
The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States (Article VI, Clause 2) establishes that the Constitution,
federal laws made pursuant to it, and treaties made under its authority, constitute the "supreme Law of the Land", and
thus take priority over any conflicting state or local laws.
The Preemption Doctrine is based on the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. It holds that certain matters are of such a national (as opposed to local) character that federal laws preempt or take precedence over state or local laws. As such, a state or local government may not pass a law inconsistent with the federal law. A state or local law may be struck down, even when it does not explicitly conflict with federal law, if a court finds that Congress has legitimately occupied the field with federal legislation. Congress has long vested the FAA with exclusive authority to regulate airspace use and air traffic control. In simple terms, this means that ordinances passed by state and local governments that attempt to do so are invalid and unenforceable.
1958: Congress passes the Federal Aviation Act
Responsibility for the oversight and implementation of aviation laws and programs is delegated to the FAA under the Federal
Aviation Act of 1958. With it, the federal government has preempted the areas of airspace use and management, air traffic control
and aviation safety. Under the legal doctrine of federal preemption, which flows from the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution,
state and local authorities do not generally have legal power to act in an area that already is subject to comprehensive
federal regulation.
1958: Torrance passes Municipal Code section 51.2.3(e)
This TMC Section, and several others, were passed to regulate airspace use and air traffic control at the Torrance
Airport for the purpose of controlling aircraft noise over the City of Torrance.
1977: City of Blue Ash, Ohio passes Ordinance 99.03
Section 99.03 of the City of Blue Ash Code of Ordinances dealt with "Noise Abatement Turns" which, for the express purpose
of controlling aircraft noise over the City of Blue Ash, required aircraft departing the airport to make a turn to a given
heading prior to reaching a described location. Pilots who failed to do so were subject to a $100 fine per "violation."
1978: U. S. District Court ruled that states and municipalities have no authority to dictate flight of aircraft
This case was brought by the United States in the U. S. District Court of Southern Ohio to
permanently enjoin the City of Blue Ash, Ohio, and its officials from enforcing Section 99.03 of the Blue Ash Code of Ordinances
and to declare that section invalid. The claim made by the United States was that the area dealt with by the section has been
preempted by the Federal Government under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution.
The court ruled: " . . a municipal ordinance resting on police power, which manages or dictates action by aircraft in navigable airspace for the purpose of noise control, is invalid under the preemption doctrine."
1980: U. S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the Blue Ash decision
This was an appeal of the 1978 ruling in District Court against the City of Blue Ash.
The ruling against the city was affirmed
by the court.
2009: Torrance Community Development Department issues "violation" letters to pilots
The letters claim that the pilot made an "early" left turn after take-off and cite a violation of Torrance Municipal Code. The
letters state: "While the F. A. A. control tower may have authorized the above noted procedure it is a violation of Torrance
Municipal Code. Please be advised that violation of T.M.C. section 51.2.3(e) is a misdemeanor subject to fine and/or jail."
2020 Feb: FAA's Chief Counsel declares T.M.C Section 51.2.3(e) to be invalid and unenforceable
Responding to an inquiry from a Torrance pilot about the validity of TMC Section 51.2.3(e), the FAA's Chief Counsel provided an opinion in a
letter dated February 18, 2020. In that opinion, the
FAA Chief Counsel cited the Blue Ash decision and concluded that "[b]ecause the Torrance code provision applies to aircraft
in flight, it is not consistent with the Federal statutory and regulatory framework" and that "[e]nforcement of the
provision would be at odds with various court opinions. As noted, state and local governments lack the authority to regulate
airspace use, management and efficiency; air traffic control; and aircraft noise at its source."
It also states that the City could promulgate "reasonable, non-arbitrary, and non-discriminatory regulations addressing aircraft noise and appropriate local interest" and that "[a]ny such regulations would need to comply with [ANCA ] and 14 C.F.R. Part 161." Part 161 outlines the process, analysis, and approvals required for imposing a noise or access restriction at an airport. But, again, ANCA deals only with turbine-powered Stage 2 and Stage 3 aircraft weighing over 12,500 lbs.
2022 March 3: FAA confirms TMC 51.2.3(e) is invalid and unenfordeable
Several FAA attorneys met with Patrick Sullivan (the Torrance City Attorney) and advised that the City of Torrance does not have authority
to regulate aircraft in flight--an exclusive authoiry given by Congress to the FAA.
2022 August 9: FAA letter confirms City of Torrance has no authority to regulate aircraft in flight
In response to Mr Sullivan's request for a written opinion, Sara Mikolop (FAA Acting Assistant Chief
Counsel for Regulations) verified the statements
FAA made in February of 2020 and March 2022: