Preemption - Case Take Aways

Question 1

Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly

Answer 1

Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly - FCLAA expressly preempts state cigarette advertising regulations

Court looks to drafting history to determine congressional intent concerning the scope of the express preemption (Found express preemption in two areas)

Unpersuaded by distinguishing adverting location regulations from the medium and content regulations

• **Must look at the FCLAA as a whole (Congress had a goal of national uniformity) **

Question 2

Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul, Director, Department of Agriculture of California

Answer 2

Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul, Director, Department of Agriculture of California

The different maturity standards of avocados are not in conflict, the Florida grows would be able to comply with the federal standard and the California standard and California can set their standards based on their own legitimate state interests)

• Dual compliance is possible – No Preemption

Question 3

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission

Answer 3

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission

California policy of no certifications for new facilities unless there are sufficient disposal sites does not impede the federal law’s objectives of developing nuclear energy. (Demonstrates how important framing the issue can be)

• Conflict Preemption: No conflict if the policy is construed as serving legitimate state economic interest but not for safety interests
• Obstacle Preemption: Congress intended the federal government to have authority to regulate safety with nuclear technology, but through the statute’s savings clause, Congress intended that the states retain their traditional responsibility in the field of regulating electrical utilities for determining questions of need, cost and other state concerns.
• Field Preemption: Court rejects the field preemption argument on the grounds that promoting nuclear power is not supposed to be accomplished “at all costs.”

Question 4

Hines, Secretary of Labor and Industry of Pennsylvania v. Davidowitz

Answer 4

Hines, Secretary of Labor and Industry of Pennsylvania v. Davidowitz - Alien Registration Act

Field Preemption: Congress intended for federal government to occupy the field of immigration regulation and not the states by providing a complete standard for the registration of aliens.

• The states cannot conflict or interfere with, or enforce additional regulations.
• Congress wanted one uniform national system to deal with this important and delicate issue (Wars have started over the treatment of aliens)