Supremacy Clause
What is the Supremacy Clause?
The Constitution, federal laws made pursuant to it, and treaties are the supreme law of the land. State laws that conflict with valid federal law are preempted and unenforceable.
Source: McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819)
Definition
The Supremacy Clause, found in Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution, establishes that the Constitution, federal statutes enacted pursuant to it, and treaties made under the authority of the United States are the supreme law of the land. Judges in every state are bound by this principle, and state constitutions and laws must yield to valid federal authority when the two conflict.
Federal preemption is the primary doctrinal vehicle through which the Supremacy Clause operates. Preemption comes in several forms: express preemption, where Congress explicitly states its intent to displace state law; field preemption, where federal regulation is so pervasive that Congress is deemed to have occupied the entire regulatory field; and conflict preemption, which arises when compliance with both federal and state law is physically impossible or where state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of federal purposes.
The Supremacy Clause is not an independent grant of federal power; rather, it establishes a rule of priority. Federal law must itself be valid under the Constitution before it can preempt state law. Courts apply a presumption against preemption in areas of traditional state authority, requiring a clear and manifest purpose of Congress to supersede state law. This presumption reflects federalism values and ensures that the federal-state balance is not inadvertently upset. The Supremacy Clause is thus a structural provision that ensures the coherence and uniformity of the federal legal system.
Key Elements
- 1Federal law must be validly enacted pursuant to the Constitution
- 2State law must conflict with federal law (express, field, or conflict preemption)
- 3For express preemption, Congress must include an explicit preemption provision
- 4For field preemption, federal regulation must be so comprehensive as to occupy the entire field
- 5For conflict preemption, compliance with both laws must be impossible or state law must obstruct federal purposes
- 6Courts apply a presumption against preemption in areas of traditional state regulation
Landmark Cases
McCulloch v. Maryland
17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819)
Established federal supremacy and held that states cannot tax or regulate the instruments of the federal government
Gibbons v. Ogden
22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1 (1824)
Applied the Supremacy Clause to strike down a state steamboat monopoly conflicting with federal licensing law
Arizona v. United States
567 U.S. 387 (2012)
Struck down state immigration provisions as preempted by comprehensive federal immigration law under field and conflict preemption
Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council
530 U.S. 363 (2000)
Applied obstacle preemption to invalidate a state law imposing sanctions on Burma that conflicted with federal foreign affairs authority
Exam Tips
- Identify which type of preemption is at issue: express, field, or conflict -- each has a different analytical framework
- Remember the presumption against preemption in areas of traditional state police power such as health, safety, and land use
- Check whether the federal law at issue is itself constitutional before analyzing preemption -- invalid federal law cannot preempt
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Treating the Supremacy Clause as an independent grant of power to Congress rather than a conflict-resolution rule that establishes federal priority
- Failing to distinguish between the three types of preemption (express, field, and conflict) and applying only one theory when multiple may be relevant
- Forgetting the presumption against preemption, which requires clear congressional intent in areas traditionally regulated by states
Memory Aid
EFC: Express, Field, Conflict -- the three types of federal preemption under the Supremacy Clause