Supreme Court Hears Challenge Over Who Counts as a 'Transportation' Worker Under the Federal Arbitration Act

The Supreme Court on argument Tuesday wrestled with whether Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) exempts only workers employed by businesses that are themselves in the transportation industry, or whether it covers any class of workers directly involved in transporting goods across state or international borders.

Miss Bennett, counsel for the side urging a broader reading of Section 1, told the Court that Flowers Foods’ proposed employer-based industry test is “atextual and unworkable.” She argued the statute’s ordinary meaning and the historical record show the term “seamen” and related language in 1925 encompassed people who worked aboard vessels regardless of who employed them, and that adding an employer-based limitation would have no basis in the statutory text.

“Flowers’ only attempt at a textual argument is its invocation of a ejusdem generis, but that argument fails from the start because Flowers can’t identify a single example of the word seamen ever being defined based on whether a worker’s employer sold transportation,” Miss Bennett said during argument.

Opposing counsel, Miss Levitt, urged a narrower reading informed by…