Hillsborough County v. Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc.

471 US 707, 105 S. Ct. 2371, 85 L. Ed. 2d 714 - Supreme Court, 1985 - Google Scholar
… Appellee argued primarily that the ordinances violated the Supremacy Clause, the Commerce
Clause, and the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause …
Save Cite Cited by 3006 How cited All 3 versions

Gibbons v. Ogden

22 US 1, 6 L. Ed. 23, 20 S. Ct. 535 - Supreme Court, 1824 - Google Scholar
22 US 1 (1824). 9 Wheat. 1. GIBBONS, Appellant, v. OGDEN, Respondent. Supreme Court of
United States. February 4, 5, and 6, 1824. March 2, 1824. 3 Mr. Webster, for the appellant …
Save Cite Cited by 14911 How cited All 3 versions

Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, Inc.

135 S. Ct. 1378, 191 L. Ed. 2d 471, 575 US 320 - Supreme Court, 2015 - Google Scholar
… It said that the providers had "an implied right of action under the Supremacy Clause to seek
injunctive relief against the enforcement or implementation of state legislation." Id., at 497 …
Save Cite Cited by 994 How cited

Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.

505 US 504, 112 S. Ct. 2608, 120 L. Ed. 2d 407 - Supreme Court, 1992 - Google Scholar
… Consideration of issues arising under the Supremacy Clause "start[s] with the assumption that
the historic police powers of the States [are] not to be superseded by …
Save Cite Cited by 5470 How cited All 3 versions

Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.

463 US 85, 103 S. Ct. 2890, 77 L. Ed. 2d 490 - Supreme Court, 1983 - Google Scholar
… A plaintiff who seeks injunctive relief from state regulation, on the ground that such regulation
is pre-empted by a federal statute which, by virtue of the Supremacy Clause of the …
Save Cite Cited by 5684 How cited All 3 versions

McCulloch v. Maryland

17 US 316, 4 L. Ed. 579, 8 S. Ct. 273 - Supreme Court, 1819 - Google Scholar
17 US 159 (____). 4 Wheat. 159. McCULLOCH v. STATE OF MARYLAND et al. Supreme
Court of United States. 162 February 22d-27th, and March 1st-3d …
Save Cite Cited by 24187 How cited All 3 versions

Maryland v. Louisiana

451 US 725, 101 S. Ct. 2114, 68 L. Ed. 2d 576 - Supreme Court, 1981 - Google Scholar
… First-Use Tax" imposed on certain uses of natural gas brought into Louisiana, principally from
the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), as violative of the Supremacy Clause and the …
Save Cite Cited by 2569 How cited All 3 versions

Golden State Transit Corp. v. Los Angeles

493 US 103, 110 S. Ct. 444, 107 L. Ed. 2d 420 - Supreme Court, 1989 - Google Scholar
… The court reasoned that "the supremacy clause does not create individual rights that may be
vindicated in an action for damages under 105 Section 1983," 660 F. Supp …
Save Cite Cited by 1261 How cited All 3 versions

Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council

530 US 363, 120 S. Ct. 2288, 147 L. Ed. 2d 352 - Supreme Court, 2000 - Google Scholar
… of Massachusetts, restricting the authority of its agencies to purchase goods or services from
companies doing business with Burma, [1] is invalid under the Supremacy Clause of the …
Save Cite Cited by 3533 How cited All 3 versions

Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.

331 US 218, 67 S. Ct. 1146, 91 L. Ed. 1447 - Supreme Court, 1947 - Google Scholar
… Act. The provisions of Illinois law on those subjects must therefore give way by virtue
of the Supremacy Clause. US Const., Art. VI, Cl. 2. Second. There …
Save Cite Cited by 6860 How cited