The Obama administration dealt a blow today to the Golden Gate Restaurant Association's legal attempt to help their members weasel out of contributing to their employees' healthcare in San Francisco. The U.S. solicitor general recommended today that the U.S. Supreme Court not review a 2008 ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which found in favor of San Francisco.

For four years, the restaurant trade group has been waging a legal battle against San Francisco's Healthy San Francisco program, which requires employers to either offer health insurance to employees or contribute money to the city's plan that does so. The restaurant group has argued that the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) preempts local governments from requiring employers to pay for health care for their workers.

Last October, the U.S. Supreme Court asked the solicitor general to weigh-in on whether the Court should hear the case. In a 26-page brief released Friday, Acting Solicitor General Neal Kumar Katyal argued that the recent enactment of federal healthcare legislation has changed the landscape, making the question of whether ERISA preempts such local requirements much less significant, so the case doesn't merit review by the high ourt.

The Golden Gate Restaurant Association did not return calls for comment on the new ruling.

The solicitor general's opinion does not necessarily mean that the high court will refuse to hear the case. "The solicitor's views are influential, but they don't guarantee anything," said Matt Dorsey a spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who has been representing San Francisco in the case. "They do not predict whether the court will take the case, and they do not predict how the court will ultimately rule if the court does take the case."

The city expects to find out whether or not the Supreme Court will hear the case by the end of June.