Legislation Commons^™

State-Action Immunity And Section 5 Of The Ftc Act, Daniel A. Crane, Adam Hester

Michigan Law Review

The state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. Brown immunizes anticompetitive state regulations from preemption by federal antitrust law so long as the state takes conspicuous ownership of its anticompetitive policy. In its 1943 Parker decision, the Supreme Court justified this doctrine, observing that no evidence of a congressional will to preempt state law appears in the Sherman Act’s legislative history or context. In addition, commentators generally assume that the New Deal court was anxious to avoid re-entangling the federal judiciary in Lochner-style substantive due process analysis. The Supreme Court has observed, without deciding, that the Federal Trade Commission might …

Pushing An End To Sanctuary Cities: Will It Happen?, Raina Bhatt

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Sanctuary jurisdictions refer to city, town, and state governments (collectively, localities or local governments) that have passed provisions to limit their enforcement of federal immigration laws. Such local governments execute limiting provisions in order to bolster community cooperation, prevent racial discrimination, focus on local priorities for enforcement, or even to a show a local policy that differs from federal policy. The provisions are in the forms of executive orders, municipal ordinances, and state resolutions. Additionally, the scope of the provisions vary by locality: some prohibit law enforcement from asking about immigration status, while others prohibit the use of state resources …

Preventing Preemption: Finding Space For States To Protect Consumers' Reputations, Elizabeth De Armond

All Faculty Scholarship

The Great Recession awoke state legislators to the power of individuals’ credit reports to hinder their economic opportunities. Many legislators would like to assuage the effects of bad historical events on the futures of the citizens that they represent. Among the topics they can address are employers’ use of credit reports, the presence of criminal record information in credit reports, and the toxic effects of identity theft and medical debt on credit reports. However, the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act’s preemptive effects must be acknowledged and negotiated. This article evaluates potential state legislative efforts against the FCRA’s preemption provisions and …

Preventing Preemption: Finding Freedom For States To Protect Their Citizens’ Personal History Information, Elizabeth De Armond

All Faculty Scholarship

The Great Recession awoke state legislators to the power of individuals’ credit reports to hinder their economic opportunities. Many legislators would like to assuage the effects of bad historical events on the futures of the citizens that they represent. Among the topics they can address are employers’ use of credit reports, the presence of criminal record information in credit reports, and the toxic effects of identity theft and medical debt on credit reports. However, the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act’s preemptive effects must be acknowledged and negotiated. This article evaluates potential state legislative efforts against the FCRA’s preemption provisions and …

Congress And The Reconstruction Of Foreign Affairs Federalism, Ryan Baasch, Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash

Michigan Law Review

Though the Constitution conspicuously bars some state involvement in foreign affairs, the states clearly retain some authority in foreign affairs. Correctly supposing that state participation may unnecessarily complicate or embarrass our nation’s foreign relations, the Supreme Court has embraced aggressive preemption doctrines that sporadically oust the states from discrete areas in foreign affairs. These doctrines are unprincipled, supply little guidance, and generate capricious results. Fortunately, there is a better way. While the Constitution permits the states a limited and continuing role, it never goes so far as guaranteeing them any foreign affairs authority. Furthermore, the Constitution authorizes Congress to enact …

Preemption In The Rehnquist And Roberts Courts: An Empirical Analysis, Michael Greve, Jonathan Klick, Michael A. Petrino, J. P. Sevilla

All Faculty Scholarship

This article presents an empirical analysis of the Rehnquist Court’s and the Roberts Court’s decisions on the federal (statutory) preemption of state law. In addition to raw outcomes for or against preemption, we examine cases by subject-matter, level of judicial consensus, tort versus regulatory preemption, party constellation, and origin in state or federal court. We present additional data and analysis on the role of state amici and of the U.S. Solicitor General in preemption cases, and we examine individual justices’ voting records. Among our findings, one stands out: over time and especially under the Roberts Court, lawyerly preemption questions have …

Preventing Preemption: Finding Freedom For States To Protect Their Citizens’ Personal History Information, Elizabeth De Armond

Elizabeth De Armond