October Term 2002 · Docket 02-299

Who controls wholesale rates for mothballed units?

Entergy seeks FERC authority over affiliate billing. Louisiana claims state power.

Official caption
Entergy La., Inc. v. Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm'n
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Entergy cites Nantahala for exclusive FERC jurisdiction.

    Louisiana disputes federal preemption of state law.

    questions_asked_by_justices

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Entergy wants FERC to control wholesale rates. Louisiana wants state control over affiliate billing.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 28, 2003.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Entergy wants FERC to control wholesale rates.

Louisiana wants state control over affiliate billing.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Entergy argues FERC has exclusive jurisdiction.

Louisiana argues state law governs affiliate billing.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Does FERC have exclusive jurisdiction over these rates?

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines federal and state power. It affects utility billing practices nationwide.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON