ARLINGTON, Va. – The coalition of NAFCU, CUNA, several nationwide bank associations and some nationwide bank card issuers have delivered their latest round of arguments in the ongoing dispute of California's proposed card regulation law. Under terms of the now suspended law, credit unions and banks with card holders in California would have had to require their cardholders to pay at least 10% of their card balances every month or inaugurate a number of different notification strategies at their own expense. The coalition sued against the law, arguing that California lacked the authority to regulate federally chartered banks and credit unions in this way. The trial judge agreed with the coalition and the State of California appealed the lower court's decision to the Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The coalition's latest round of arguments sought to uphold the lower court's decision, arguing that the previous case law in cases which involve federal preemption allow federal agencies very wide latitude in what areas they preempt, according to Eric Richard, CUNA's General Counsel. The case law indicates that federal agencies have a lot of leeway in acting against things that could block interstate commerce, Richard explained. “In our case, interstate commerce in financial services.” California has at least two weeks to file a response to the coalition's rebuttal, a deadline California can also ask to be extended by an additional two weeks. Richard expects that, once the court receives California's last filing, it may set a date for oral arguments. “It is possible that the court could decide the case without oral argument, but that is fairly rare,” Richard said. He also acknowledged that the federal appeals court for the ninth circuit has a reputation for being fairly liberal, but said he could not comment on what that might mean in this particular case. [email protected]