Talent Agencies Act (California)

The Talent Agencies Act.[1] has been the focus of controversy since its 1978 passage. As enforced, it gives actors, writers and other artists the opportunity to disgorge their financial obligations when they petition the California Labor Commission, claiming their talent representatives found them work without having a talent agency license.[2]

That enforcement was challenged in a lawsuit brought by the National Conference of Personal Managers (Case No. 13-55545) alleging that the TAA on its face and as applied was unconstitutional. The matter was fully submitted and oral arguments were heard by the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on March 6, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1 of the Richard H. Chambers Court of Appeals Building, 125 South Grand Avenue, Pasadena CA 91105.[3]

It was not the first time the Act has faced legal challenges, caused because the "inconsistent interpretations by the Labor Commissioner and courts [have created] an environment where no one is quite sure what is allowed. The ambiguity leaves unlicensed personal managers exposed to staggering potential liability."[4]

The Labor Commissioner's decades-long complete voiding of all contracts even if a single violation was found to be an incorrect interpretation of law by the California Supreme Court;[5] the U.S. Supreme Court found the Labor Commissioner's interpretation relevant to arbitration was also incorrect ([6]). If the Ninth Circuit continues this trend, finding the TAA facially violates the Interstate Commerce Clause and the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, and as applied violates the Contract Clause, Commerce Clause, First, Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments, which has led to personal managers forfeiting an estimated $500,000,000 in otherwise-owed commissions (see [7]), the voiding of any contracts will end. Eliminating that consequence will align the Act's enforcement with a litany of California Supreme Court determinations (see [8] a