Law Commons^™

Qualified Sovereignty, Kate Sablosky Elengold, Jonathan D. Glater

Washington Law Review

Sometimes acts of the federal government cause harm; sometimes acts of contractors hired by the federal government cause harm. In cases involving the latter, federal contractors often invoke the sovereign’s constitutionally granted and doctrinally expanded supremacy to restrict avenues for the injured to recover even from private actors. In prior work, we analyzed how federal contractors exploit three “sovereign shield” defenses—preemption, derivative sovereign immunity, and derivative intergovernmental immunity—to evade liability, accountability, and oversight.

This Article considers whether, when, and how private federal contractors should be held accountable in a court of law. We argue that a contractor should be required …

Navigating The Identity Thicket: Trademark's Lost Theory Of Personality, The Right Of Publicity, And Preemption, Jennifer E. Rothman

All Faculty Scholarship

Both trademark and unfair competition laws and state right of publicity laws protect against unauthorized uses of a person’s identity. Increasingly, however, these rights are working at odds with one another, and can point in different directions with regard to who controls a person’s name, likeness, and broader indicia of identity. This creates what I call an "identity thicket" of overlapping and conflicting rights over a person’s identity. Current jurisprudence provides little to no guidance on the most basic questions surrounding this thicket, such as what right to use a person’s identity, if any, flows from the transfer of marks …

Putting A Gag On Farm Whistleblowers: The Right To Lie And The Right To Reamin Silent Confront State Agricultural Protectionism, Rita-Marie Cain Reid, Amber L. Kingery

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Whistleblowers play an important role in filling gaps in government food safety systems. Unfortunately, several dominant food-producing states have pursued legislative initiatives that punish farm whistleblowers and silence investigative tactics. First, this research describes various state legislative initiatives that curb criticism of agriculture. The work analyzes the federal food safety system and how these protections limiting agricultural criticism contravene that food safety net. Further, the research analyzes the free speech concerns in the newest protectionist laws. The analysis recommends strategies and future research to improve agricluture safety and protect free speech in an evolving food safety landscape.

Local And State Governments Are Taking The Stage When It Is Fda's Curtain Call - Are Local And State Governments' Safety Warnings Preempted By Federal Law?, Melissa M. Card

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Eliminated from fad diets, sworn off by celebrities, and frantically reformulated out of processed foods, added sugars have been deemed the new nutritional scoundrel. Recent studies from the American Heart Association, the World Health Organization, and the American Cancer Association demonstrate that the consumption of added sugar leads to increased risks of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and gout. While all foods containing added sugar are deemed unhealthy, Sugary-Sweetened Beverages ("SSBs") are said to be especially toxic by the American health community, by virtue of these beverages' being excessively high in added sugar content, low in satiety, and incomplete in compensation …

Preemption According To Islamic Jurisprudence, The Uae Transactions Law And, The Jordanian Law: A Comparative Study, Mohammad Mahmoud Abu Lail

UAEU Law Journal

Islamic jurisprudence has dealt in-depth with the concept of Preemption. Preemption is derived from an established Islamic jurisprudentialmax that: damage is to be removed either by compensation or restitution.

The research aims at investigating and analyzing the concept of Preemption in Islamic jurisprudence, UAE Transaction Law and, Jordanian Law. It focuses on the following issues: definition of Preemption, its legitimacy, its nature and, attempts to expose various legal doctrines regarding Preemption

Erisa Preemption After Gobeille V. Liberty Mutual: Completing The Retrenchment Of Shaw, Edward A. Zelinsky

Articles

Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. is the U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent preemption decision under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). In Gobeille, the Court completed the process of reconciling the restrained approach to ERISA preemption announced in New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance Co. with the Court’s literal and expansive approach adopted earlier in Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. Gobeille consummated this reconciliation by confirming the sub silentio retrenchment of Shaw and its “plain language” approach in favor of Traveler’s broader construction of ERISA preemption. …

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 …

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 …

Short-Circuiting Contract Law: The Federal Circuit's Contract Law Jurisprudence And Intellectual Property Federalism, Shubha Ghosh

Shubha Ghosh

The Federal Circuit was established in 1982 as an appellate court with limited jurisdiction over patent claims. However, the Federal Circuit has used this limited jurisdiction to expand its reach into contract law, developing a federal common law of contract. Given the growing importance of patent litigation in the past three decades, this creation of an independent body of contract law creates uncertainty in transactions involving patents. This troublesome development received attention in Stanford v Roche, a 2011 Supreme Court decision upholding the Federal Circuit's invalidation of a patent assignment to Stanford University. This Article documents the development of …

Deciding Who Decides: Searching For A Deference Standard When Agencies Preempt State Law, John R. Ablan

John R Ablan

When a federal agency determines that the statute that it administers or regulations it has promulgated preempt state law, how much deference must a federal court give to that determination? In Wyeth v. Levine, the Supreme Court expressly declined to decide what standard of deference courts should apply when an agency makes a preemption determination pursuant to a specific congressional delegation to do so. Under this circumstance, this Article counsels against applying any single deference standard to an agency’s entire determination. Instead, it observes that preemption determinations are a complex inquiry involving questions of federal law, state law, and …

Ending Judgment Arbitrage: Jurisdictional Competition And The Enforcement Of Foreign Money Judgments In The United States, Gregory Shill

Gregory Shill

Recent multi-billion-dollar damage awards issued by foreign courts against large American companies have focused attention on the once-obscure, patchwork system of enforcing foreign-country judgments in the United States. That system’s structural problems are even more serious than its critics have charged. However, the leading proposals for reform overlook the positive potential embedded in its design.

In the United States, no treaty or federal law controls the domestication of foreign judgments; the process is instead governed by state law. Although they are often conflated in practice, the procedure consists of two formally and conceptually distinct stages: foreign judgments must first be …

A Shift In Power: Why Increased Urban Drilling Necessitates A Change In Regulatory Authority Comment., Riley W. Vanham

St. Mary's Law Journal

Historically, Texas has boasted a very lucrative oil and gas industry, which has been vital to the state’s successful economy. Due to increased drilling in urban areas, particularly the Barnett Shale, the number of affected surface owners multiplied overnight, attracting attention to oil and gas issues. Legislation has been purported to remedy the longtime conflict in Texas property law caused by the dominance of the mineral estate over the surface estate. But no bill has passed having major policy-change implications. Currently, local governments freely adopt and enforce oil and gas regulations. These ordinances vary from city-to-city, creating inconsistencies for operators …

Proving Preemption By Proving Exemption: The Quandary Of The National Securities Market Improvement Act, Jeffrey D. Chadwick

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Final Battle For Preemption: The Fda And Prescription Drug Labeling Product Liability Actions, Mary J. Davis

ExpressO

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has promulgated a new regulation which revises the format for prescription drug labeling, and, in the process, has taken the position that the regulation displaces, or preempts, state products liability laws that seek to assess liability on the manufacturer for a label’s warning adequacy. In the FDA’s 100 year history, it has not taken the position that federal prescription drug labeling regulations preempt common law tort claims until the last few years, beginning with Motus v. Pfizer in 2002. This position, radical to many and rational to others, places federal preemption of prescription drug …

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power To Articulate And Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, And Punitive Damages, Thomas C. Galligan

ExpressO

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power to Articulate and Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, and Punitive Damages analyzes and critiques the three primary areas in which the U.S. Supreme Court has found federal constitutional limits on a state’s power to articulate, develop, and apply its common law of torts. It is the first piece to consider all three areas together as an emerging body of jurisprudence which Professor Galligan calls U.S. Supreme Court tort reform. After setting forth a modest model of adjudication, the article applies that model to each of the three areas: defamation and related …

Hazardous Chemicals In The Workplace: The Employer's Obligation To Inform Employees And The Community., Nelson A. Clare

St. Mary's Law Journal

Significant changes have recently occurred in reporting requirements for employers who have hazardous chemicals in their workplaces. The amended Federal Hazard Communication Standard requires private employers, engaged in a business using hazardous chemicals, to communicate to employees the potential hazards. The Standard requires employers to use: 1) a Hazard Communication Program, 2) labels and other forms of warning, 3) material safety data sheets, and 4) information and training about hazardous chemicals. Local and state governments must compare and reconcile the various and complex provisions relating to the Standard to ensure compliance with all requirements of the respective laws. The Texas …