Citation network
Ray Vs. Atlantic Richfield Co.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 06, 1978
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Ray v. AtlanticSearch
-
Richfield Co. - 435 U.S. 151 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court Ray v. AtlanticSearch
-
Richfield Co., 435 U.S. 151 (1978) Ray v. AtlanticSearch
-
requirements of that provision, standing alone, are invalid under the Supremacy Clause. Huron Portland Cement Co. v. DetroitSearch
-
like a local pilotage requirement, is not the type of regulation demanding a uniform national rule, See Cooley v. BoardSearch
-
Parts v. andSearch
-
the Tanker Law could not coexist with the PWSA, and was totally invalid. Atlantic Richfield Co. v. EvansSearch
-
Rice v. SantaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Jones v. RathSearch
-
as to make reasonable the inference that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it. Pennsylvania R. Co. v. PublicSearch
-
so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject. Hines v. DavidowitzSearch
-
by the federal law and the character of obligations imposed by it may reveal the same purpose. Southern R. Co. v. RailroadSearch
-
Charleston & W. C. R. Co. v. VarnvilleSearch
-
Napier v. AtlanticSearch
-
Accord, City of Burbank v. LockheedSearch
-
Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. PaulSearch
-
Packing Co., supra at 430 U. S. 526 , 430 U. S. 540 -541. Accord, De Canas v. BicaSearch
-
enrolled vessels, and that they preclude a State from imposing its own pilotage requirements upon them. See Anderson v. PacificSearch
-
imposed by a State. Douglas v. SeacoastSearch
-
Products, Inc., 431 U. S. 265 , 431 U. S. 277 (1977), citing Smith v. MarylandSearch
-
and Huron Portland Cement Co. v. DetroitSearch
-
law addressed to the object also sought to be achieved by the challenged state regulation. Huron Portland Cement Co. v. DetroitSearch
-
Id. at 362 U. S. 445 . Kelly v. WashingtonSearch
-
those matters not touched by the federal statute. Here, we have the very situation that Huron Portland Cement Co. v. DetroitSearch
-
and Kelly v. WashingtonSearch
-
States are not permitted to use their police power to enact such a regulation. Bethehem Steel Co. v. NewSearch
-
entering a particular body of water is not the type of regulation that demands a uniform national rule. See Cooley v. BoardSearch
-
whereas registered vessels are those engaged in trade with foreign countries. Douglas v. SeacoastSearch
-
Court has previously observed that ship design and construction standards are matters for national attention. In Kelly v. WashingtonSearch
-
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith v. WareSearch
-
U. S. 117 , 414 U. S. 127 (1973), quoting Silver v. NewSearch
-
De Canas v. BicaSearch
-
Packet Co. v. CatlettsburgSearch
-
Pike v. BruceSearch
-
and licensing of a vessel give it authority to engage in coastwise trade and to navigate in state waters, Douglas v. SeacoastSearch
-
Douglas v. SeacoastSearch
-
Huron Portland Cement Co. v. DetroitSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Ray v. AtlanticSearch
-
the Supremacy Clause. Huron Portland Cement Co. v. DetroitSearch
-
See Cooley v. BoardSearch
-
Parts v. andSearch
-
Atlantic Richfield Co. v. EvansSearch
-
Pennsylvania R. Co. v. PublicSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial