it does appear as though the Supreme Court is poised to side with New Jersey in its bid to end the Waterfront commission senior correspondent Brenda Flanagan reports on the arguments from both sides of the river it's a hostile divorce that started down on the shipping docks and ended up before the U.S Supreme Court New Jersey wants to quit the Bi-State Waterfront commission it created with New York as a joint partner 70 years ago Jersey officials claimed the agency's smothering Commerce with over-regulation and that it's ill-equipped to fulfill its original Mission targeting corruption and organized crime but New York sued and today tried hard to convince the high court that jerseys got no right to just walk away unilateral termination is not allowed unless the compact expressly grants that power the states would have said expressly if they were going to allow this one state to withdraw at any time and regulate a loan in their shared Port New York claims that even though 80 percent of the cargo enters through ports Newark and Elizabeth New Yorkers still have a vital interest in preserving their economy and preventing corruption but Jersey argued the mission was never intended to last forever and that New Jersey as a sovereign stake can just leave there is evidence as we've discussed that this was understood to be temporary and there's nothing in the text of the compact that suggests any sort of Perpetual or binding obligations what's at stake control over licensing Dock Workers taxing payrolls and ferreting out criminality former Senator Ray lesniak sponsored the bill pulling New Jersey out of the commission several years ago he recalled power struggles between the longshoremen's union shippers and the commission they had to approve how many workers you had and how many hours they had to do is there incredible overreach by the commission and totally unnecessary most importantly it was hurting um our economy the justices looked at the commission compact through the lens of contract law which seemed to favor New Jersey's argument if the parties don't expect this contract to be indefinite unilateral withdrawal is presumed it's a simple rule here the parties clearly stated it wasn't going to be forever unlike your Port Authority Compact and Chief Justice John Roberts viewed the commission as a much smaller entity than the actual Port Authority easier to unravel it's hard to unscramble the eggs when you're talking about the Port Authority as a whole here it's it's not that disruptive I think it's a it's a pretty safe bet that the court is going to affirm a New Jersey's decision to leave the Waterfront commission Barry eventchick represented New Jersey on that commission from 2009 to 2010 he believes Jersey won the legal argument but isn't convinced New Jersey needs to leave the commission we could speculate as to what really lies behind the decision made by New Jersey several years ago to leave the Waterfront commission I can't imagine that it was a conclusion that there was no longer a criminality or corruption existing and needing the Waterfront commission's expertise we can do a better job with the state police handling any potential corruption at the Port businesses have changed since the the uh on the waterfront uh you know it's not mobbed up uh which was the Genesis of the uh of the Waterfront Commission in the first place lesniak expects New Jersey to win in a quote unanimous slam dunk decision the high courts expected to rule in Spring I'm Brenda Flanagan NJ Spotlight news thank you [Music]