Wal-Mart Hard Sell in Big Apple

What good are anti-trust laws if they don't apply to local governments? The L.A.Times has a story about arguably the largest restraint of trade going on in the U.S. today,Wal-Mart being zoned out of NYC:

This year, the City Council refused to grant a zoning variance for what would have been the first, in Queens, citing the pay and benefits Wal-Mart gives its employees.

This month, the New York City Central Labor Council staged a rally outside a Greenwich Village school urging parents not to buy back-to-school supplies at the nonunionized company's stores in surrounding areas. And last week the City Council voted 46-1 to require all large food retailers to offer a minimum level of healthcare benefits.

Although that legislation did not name any retailer, and could affect about 12,000 employees working at large grocery stores, its sponsor, Councilwoman Christine C. Quinn, said one goal was to create a barrier that would keep Wal-Mart out of the city unless it increased health benefits for workers.

So,the a "bill of attainder" was passed because Wal-Mart's competitors and unions who don't want to compete,and they bought off the politicians.It appears that NYC council (full of Democrats) wants the poor and middle class to pay higher prices.How compassionate.Could Wal-Mart sue the individual members of the city council not as council members but as individuals restraining trade who've taken compaign contributions to limit competiton?