Also known as: preemption clauses · pre-emption clause · pre-emption clauses · preemption provision · preemption language
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A statutory provision in federal legislation that declares the extent to which federal requirements displace conflicting state law. The clause operates by specifying when state rules are superseded on the same subject matter. Courts examine the clause language together with any savings provisions to determine the scope of displacement.
The State of Franklin enacts a statute licensing private operators to conduct sports wagering at stadiums. A federal statute states that no state shall enact or maintain any law authorizing such wagering. The court concludes that the federal statute does not function as a preemption clause because it directs state legislative action rather than regulating private conduct directly.
ProCD sells software containing a license agreement inside the box that restricts resale of the data. Zeidenberg purchases the product and posts the data online in violation of the license terms. The court applies the federal copyright statute's preemption clause and holds that the state contract claim is not displaced because enforcement of the license does not interfere with federal copyright objectives.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A driver injured in a collision sues American Honda alleging that the vehicle was defectively designed for lacking an airbag. Federal motor vehicle safety standards permit manufacturers to choose among several restraint options including airbags. The court determines that the federal preemption clause displaces the state tort claim because the claim would impose a requirement that conflicts with the federal regulatory choice.
A patient sues Medtronic after a balloon catheter ruptures during surgery, asserting that the device violated New York tort duties regarding design and labeling. Federal medical device regulations impose specific requirements on the approved catheter. The court holds that the federal preemption clause displaces the state claims because they would impose additional requirements on a device already subject to federal standards.
A patient who suffered severe side effects from a prescription drug sues the manufacturer for failing to strengthen the warning label under state tort law. Federal drug regulations approved the existing label after agency review. The court concludes that the federal preemption clause does not displace the state claim because compliance with federal labeling requirements does not exempt the manufacturer from common law duties.
A patient injured by a defective pacemaker sues the manufacturer under state tort law for inadequate design and manufacturing. Federal medical device regulations impose general requirements rather than device-specific standards on the pacemaker. The court determines that the federal preemption clause does not displace the state claims because the federal rules do not impose requirements that conflict with the asserted state duties.
A preemption clause fails when the federal statute directs state legislatures rather than regulating private conduct. The clause must target private actors for the Supremacy Clause to render conflicting state rules unenforceable.
Courts examine the clause language together with any savings clause and the federal regulatory scheme. If the federal requirements set a floor rather than a ceiling, state tort duties may survive.
A savings clause preserves common law liability even when the federal statute contains a preemption clause. It prevents the preemption clause from extinguishing all state remedies.
No. The clause displaces only those claims that impose requirements different from or in addition to federal device-specific requirements.
…which see Norfolk & Western Ry. v. Train Dispatchers , 499 U.S. 117, 111 S.Ct. 1156, 113 L.Ed.2d 95 (1991)—courts usually read preemption clauses to leave private contracts unaffected. American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens , — U.S. —, 115 S.Ct. 817, 130 L.Ed.2d 715 (1995), provides a nice illustration. A federal statute preempts any…