Law Commons^™

Protecting Court Borders: Fencing Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. V. Nlrb Out Of Illinois Civil Courts, Patrick D. Kenneally

Northern Illinois University Law Review

An increasing number of jurisdictions have seized upon the reasoning in the United States Supreme Court's decision Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB to deny undocumented immigrant plaintiffs recovery for lost future earnings at their projected earnings while living in the United States. However, a correct reading of Hoffman and understanding of its precedent reveals a narrow ruling confined to the field of federal labor law incapable of influencing the availability and distribution of damages in personal injury actions in Illinois state courts. Illinois common law currently grants undocumented plaintiffs the right to recover damages for amounts they would have …

The Battle Over Implied Preemption: Products Liability And The Fda, Mary J. Davis

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

A mere five years ago, the Food and Drug Administration (the "FDA") began, for the first time in its 100-year history, to take the position that its prescription drug labeling regulations defeated the ability of injured plaintiffs to pursue common law tort claims based on the adequacy of the labeling. This position, radical to many and rational to others, places federal preemption of prescription drug labeling actions directly in the center of the debate over the proper roles of federal regulation and state tort laws in promoting product safety. The U.S. Supreme Court has contributed to this debate with several …

The New Massachusetts Health Law: Preemption And Experimentation, Edward A. Zelinsky

William & Mary Law Review

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) preempts major features of the new Massachusetts health law. Although regrettable, this conclusion is mandated by ERISA's statutory terminology and the controlling case law. Other states, in fashioning their health care policies, are looking at elements of the new Massachusetts law. Just as ERISA preempts the individual and business contribution mandates of the Massachusetts statute, ERISA will preempt any similar provisions adopted by other states.

Because state experimentation with health care is particularly desirable today, Congress should, at a minimum, amend ERISA to validate the new Massachusetts health law. More comprehensively, …

Noontime Dumping: Why States Have Broad Discretion To Regulate Onboard Treatments Of Ballast Water, Kyle H. Landis-Marinello

Michigan Law Review

Ballast water discharges from shipping vessels are responsible for spreading numerous forms of aquatic invasive species, a form of biological pollution that leads to billions of dollars in annual costs. In the wake of inaction from the federal government and inaction from the shipping industry, several Great Lakes states are currently considering legislation to address the problem. Michigan has already passed a law to prevent ballast water introductions of invasive species. As states begin to regulate ballast water discharges from oceangoing vessels, such laws will likely face challenges based on the constitutional principles of the Dormant Commerce Clause and the …

Saving Savings Clauses From Judicial Preemption, Sandra Zellmer

Sandi Zellmer

Savings clauses can be found in an array of federal statutes governing public health, welfare, and environmental quality. Like explicit preemption provisions, the function of a savings clause is to differentiate the boundaries of federal and state authority. Unlike preemption clauses, however, savings clauses strike the balance in favor of the states and state law remedies. Despite the existence of savings clauses, many of the Supreme Court’s recent preemption opinions have invalidated state laws that are more stringent than the federal regulatory threshold, based on a crabbed interpretation of statutory language, a myopic view of congressional purposes, or both. Even …

“Manifest” Destiny?: How Some Courts Have Fallaciously Come To Require A Greater Showing Of Congressional Intent For Jurisdictional Exhaustion Than They Require For Preemption, Colin Miller

Colin Miller

Abstract for Colin Miller, “Manifest” Destiny?: How Some Courts Have Fallaciously Come To Require A Greater Showing Of Congressional Intent For Jurisdictional Exhaustion Than They Require For Preemption Congress engages in preemption when it enacts federal legislation that supersedes any existing state and local laws in a particular field and proscribes any future state and local regulation of that field. Because preemption repeals state and local legislative authority over traditional areas of state law, courts have understandably required that preemptive legislation evince “clear and manifest” Congressional intent to supersede state and local legislation. Conversely, when Congress includes a jurisdictional exhaustion …

Preemption By Armed Force Of Trans-Boundry Terrorist Threats: The Russian Perspective, Bakhtiyar R. Tuzmukhamedov

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

Law Casebook Description And Table Of Contents: Constitutional Environmental And Natural Resources Law [Outline], Jim May, Robin Craig

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

6 pages.

"James May, Widener University School of Law" -- Agenda

Municipal Overreaching; Federal Preemption As It Applies To Town Ordinances Outlawing The Rental Of Housing To Undocumented Aliens, Hayden Patrick O'Byrne

Hayden Patrick O'Byrne

Within the past year or so a handful of towns around the United States have passed ordinances prohibiting undocumented aliens from renting housing. This paper explores how these ordinances are incompatible with the Federal Immigration Scheme and preempted by Federal Law.

Complete Preemption And The Separation Of Powers, Trevor W. Morrison

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This is a short response, published in Pennumbra (the online companion to the University of Pennsylvania Law Review), to Gil Seinfeld's recent article, "The Puzzle of Complete Preemption."

I first sound some notes of agreement with Professor Seinfeld's critique of the Supreme Court's complete preemption doctrine. I then turn to his proposed reshaping of the doctrine around the interest in federal legal uniformity. Although certainly more satisfying than the Court's account, Professor Seinfeld's refashioning of the doctrine raises a number of new difficulties. In particular, it invites the federal courts to engage in a range of line-drawing exercises to which …

Sample Prescription Drugs And The "Learned Intermediary": Liability Without Preemption, Susan Poser

Susan Poser

In Defense Of Complete Preemption, Paul E. Mcgreal

Paul E. McGreal

Recent writings by Professors Gil Seinfeld and Trevor Morrison criticize the Supreme Court's complete preemption doctrine as misguided and unconstitutional, respectively. Professor Seinfeld suggests reforming the doctrine around field preemption, and Professor Morrison rejects complete preemption as inconsistent with separation of powers. This response defends the Supreme Court's doctrine as it currently stands: A state law claim arises under federal law (and so may be removed to federal court) when a federal statute both preempts the claim and supplies an exclusive federal remedy. This doctrine is a sensible application of the well-pleaded complaint rule that prevents improper circumvention of federal …

On Virtual Worlds: Copyright And Contract At The Dawn Of The Virtual Age, Erez Reuveni

Erez Reuveni

This Article argues that copyright law can and should apply to artistic and literary creations occurring entirely in virtual worlds. First, the Article introduces the concept of virtual worlds as places millions of people visit not only for entertainment but also for life and work. Second, the Article reviews the philosophical justifications for copyright, examines objections to applying copyright to virtual, rather than real, creative works, and concludes that neither precludes copyright for virtual creations. Third, the Article articulates how copyright law would function within virtual spaces and reviews copyrightable creations from the perspective of both game developers and players. …

Federalism And The Tug Of War Within: Seeking Checks And Balance In The Interjurisdictional Gray Area, Erin Ryan

Erin Ryan

Federalism and the Tug of War Within explores tensions that arise among the underlying values of federalism when state or federal actors regulate within the “interjurisdictional gray area” that implicates both local and national concerns. Drawing examples from the failed response to Hurricane Katrina and other interjurisdictional problems to illustrate this conflict, the Article demonstrates how the trajectory set by the New Federalism’s “strict-separationist” model of dual sovereignty inhibits effective governance in these contexts. In addition to the anti-tyranny, pro-accountability, and localism-protective values of federalism, the Article identifies a problem-solving value inherent in the capacity requirement of American federalism’s subsidiarity …

Days Without Immigrants: Analysis And Implications Of The Treatment Of Immigration Rallies Under The National Labor Relations Act, Michael C. Duff

All Faculty Scholarship

The massive immigration rallies of early 2006 were prompted by anticipated congressional action classifying all unauthorized workers as felons subject to immediate deportation. While a product of federal immigration policy, the rallies implicate federal labor law because they could be characterized as concerted employee action resulting in a series of work stoppages.

Some employees were discharged for missing work to attend the rallies, so an initial question is whether participation in the rallies is protected activity under the National Labor Relations Act. But even assuming the rallies were attended by unauthorized workers, those workers are undeniably employees within the meaning …

Addressing The Incoherency Of The Preemption Provision Of The Copyright Act Of 1976, Joseph P. Bauer

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Section 301 of the Copyright Act of 1976 expressly preempts state law actions that are within the "general scope of copyright" and that assert claims that are "equivalent to" the rights conferred by the Act. The Act eliminated the previous system of common law copyright for unpublished works, which had prevailed under the prior 1909 Copyright Act. By federalizing copyright law, the drafters of the statute sought to achieve uniformity and to avoid the potential for state protection of infinite duration.

The legislative history of § 301 stated that this preemption provision was set forth "in the clearest and most …

Collateralizing Intellectual Property, Xuan-Thao Nguyen

Articles

This Article identifies and critiques the collateralization of intellectual property, revealing the complexity of intersecting secured transaction law, namely Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, and doctrinal intellectual property laws such as patent law, copyright law, and trademark law. The inquiry challenges the silence surrounding the pervasive use of intellectual property as collateral in secured financing and suggests changes to the existing framework on secured financing law.

The Article proceeds as follows: Part II discusses the normative intellectual property rights for patents, copyrights, and trademarks and how such rights are utilized as corporate assets. Part III describes different forms …

Nothing Is Real: Protecting The Regulatory Void Through Federal Preemption By Inaction, Robert L. Glicksman

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

Whether a federal statute preempts state law has important implications for the allocation of power between the federal and state governments. One aspect of preemption doctrine that has received relatively little scholarly attention is whether the federal government's failure to act is capable of preempting state law and, if so, when. In the regulatory context, Congress must first decide whether as a normative matter it should preempt state law despite its decision not to regulate activities regulated by states. Once Congress has done so, the courts may need to interpret federal legislation to determine whether Congress has decided to preempt …

A Collective Action Perspective On Ceiling Preemption By Federal Environmental Regulation: The Case Of Global Climate Change, Robert L. Glicksman, Richard E. Levy

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

In an era of regulatory skepticism, proponents of regulation in general and environmental regulation in particular face a number of new political and legal hurdles, particularly at the federal level. Frustrated with federal inaction or weak federal regulation, it is increasingly common for states and local governments to adopt environmental laws that seek to provide greater environmental protection. The critical question is when federal environmental law provides a ceiling, preempting such state regulatory programs. In this article, which is part of a forthcoming symposium on federal preemption in the Northwestern Law Review, Professors Glicksman and Levy develop a framework for …

Constitutional Isolationism And The Limits Of State Separation Of Powers As A Barrier To Interstate Compacts, Jim Rossi

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In this Essay, I address the question of which branch of state government ought to have the authority to negotiate interstate compacts - a question of state separation of powers. Recent case law interpreting state constitutions in the context of Indian gambling compacts provides a particularly fertile ground for exploring this question, as it illustrates how courts are struggling to find a way to allow state executive officials greater autonomy to negotiate interstate compacts. Part I illustrates how traditional notions of separation of powers under state constitutions can be understood to pose a barrier to executive branch negotiation of interstate …

Preemption, Agency Cost Theory, And Predatory Lending By Banking Agents: Are Federal Regulators Biting Off More Than They Can Chew , Christopher L. Peterson

American University Law Review

A pitched battle is currently being waged for control of the American banking industry. For over a hundred years, the federal and state governments have maintained a complex, but relatively stable truce in their contest for power. At the beginning of our republic, state governments were the primary charterers and regulators of banks. In the wake of the Civil War, the National Bank Act created parity between federal and state banks, cementing the notion of a dual banking system that endured through the twentieth century. But in the past five years, the federal government has increasingly used its powers under …