ARLINGTON, Va. – The coalition of NAFCU, CUNA, severalnationwide bank associations and some nationwide bank card issuershave delivered their latest round of arguments in the ongoingdispute of California's proposed card regulation law. Under termsof the now suspended law, credit unions and banks with card holdersin California would have had to require their cardholders to pay atleast 10% of their card balances every month or inaugurate a numberof different notification strategies at their own expense. Thecoalition sued against the law, arguing that California lacked theauthority to regulate federally chartered banks and credit unionsin this way. The trial judge agreed with the coalition and theState of California appealed the lower court's decision to theFederal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The coalition'slatest round of arguments sought to uphold the lower court'sdecision, arguing that the previous case law in cases which involvefederal preemption allow federal agencies very wide latitude inwhat areas they preempt, according to Eric Richard, CUNA's GeneralCounsel. The case law indicates that federal agencies have a lot ofleeway in acting against things that could block interstatecommerce, Richard explained. “In our case, interstate commerce infinancial services.” California has at least two weeks to file aresponse to the coalition's rebuttal, a deadline California canalso ask to be extended by an additional two weeks. Richard expectsthat, once the court receives California's last filing, it may seta date for oral arguments. “It is possible that the court coulddecide the case without oral argument, but that is fairly rare,”Richard said. He also acknowledged that the federal appeals courtfor the ninth circuit has a reputation for being fairly liberal,but said he could not comment on what that might mean in thisparticular case. [email protected]