supremacy clause in Alaska

9 Alaska opinions name it 2 courts 1970–2003 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Alaska courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

Case	Followed	Cited
Testa v. Kattgreen scotus · 1947 · cited in 2 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981 2 sentences 1981Testa v. Katt, 330 U.S. 386, 390-94 , 67 S.Ct. 810, 812-14 , 91 L.Ed. 967, 970-72 (1947); Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Ry. 1981Testa v. Katt, 330 U.S. 386, 390-94 , 67 S.Ct. 810, 812-14 , 91 L.Ed. 967, 970-72 (1947); Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Ry.	2	2
Bald v. RCA ALASCOMgreen alaska · 1977 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 2 sentences 2003See id. at 897, 900-01; Bald [v. RCA Alascom, 569 P.2d 1328, 1331 (Alaska 1977)]. [13] In contrast, questions of implied federal preemption in Indian tax cases "are not resolved by reference to standards of pre-emption that have developed in other areas of the law" and are "not limited to cases in which Congress has expresslyas compared to impliedlypre-empted the state activity." [14] Instead, we have applied a flexible pre-emption analysis sensitive to the particular facts and legislation involved. 2003See id. at 897, 900-01; Bald [v. RCA Alascom, 569 P.2d 1328, 1331 (Alaska 1977) [ 13 ] In contrast, questions of implied federal preemption in Indian tax cases "are not resolved by reference to standards of preemption that have developed in other areas of the law" and are "not limited to cases in which Congress has expressly-as compared to impliedly-pre-empted the state activity." 14 Instead, we have applied a flexible preemption analysis sensitive to the particular facts and legislation involved.	1	1
State v. F/V BARANOFgreen alaska · 1984 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986 2 sentences 1986Federal legislation preempts conflicting state legislation under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. [3] State v. F/V Baranof, 677 P.2d 1245, 1249 (Alaska), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 , 105 S.Ct. 98 , 83 L.Ed.2d 43 (1984). 1986Federal legislation preempts conflicting state legislation under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. 3 State v. F/V Baranof, 677 P.2d 1245, 1249 (Alaska), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 , 105 S.Ct. 98 , 83 L.Ed.2d 43 (1984).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alaska. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

Case	Cited	Years
Counselman v. Hitchcock green scotus · 1892 2 sentences 1992Counselman, 142 U.S. at 585 , 12 S.Ct. at 206 . 1992Counselman, 142 U.S. at 585 , 12 S.Ct. at 206 .	1	1992–1992
Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc. green scotus · 1989 2 sentences 1991Under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution, 7 federal patent law preempts state awards of patent-like protection. “[S]tate regulation of intellectual property must yield to the extent that it clashes with the balance struck by Congress in our patent laws.” Id. at 152 , 109 S.Ct. at 978 . 1991Under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution, 7 federal patent law preempts state awards of patent-like protection. “[S]tate regulation of intellectual property must yield to the extent that it clashes with the balance struck by Congress in our patent laws.” Id. at 152 , 109 S.Ct. at 978 .	1	1991–1991
Richard I, Inc. v. Ambach green scotus · 1984 2 sentences 1986Federal legislation preempts conflicting state legislation under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. [3] State v. F/V Baranof, 677 P.2d 1245, 1249 (Alaska), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 , 105 S.Ct. 98 , 83 L.Ed.2d 43 (1984). 1986Federal legislation preempts conflicting state legislation under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. 3 State v. F/V Baranof, 677 P.2d 1245, 1249 (Alaska), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 , 105 S.Ct. 98 , 83 L.Ed.2d 43 (1984).	1	1986–1986
Renfroe v. Kirkpatrick green scotus · 1984 2 sentences 1986Federal legislation preempts conflicting state legislation under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. [3] State v. F/V Baranof, 677 P.2d 1245, 1249 (Alaska), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 , 105 S.Ct. 98 , 83 L.Ed.2d 43 (1984). 1986Federal legislation preempts conflicting state legislation under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. 3 State v. F/V Baranof, 677 P.2d 1245, 1249 (Alaska), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 , 105 S.Ct. 98 , 83 L.Ed.2d 43 (1984).	1	1986–1986
F/V Baranof v. Alaska green scotus · 1984 2 sentences 1986Federal legislation preempts conflicting state legislation under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. [3] State v. F/V Baranof, 677 P.2d 1245, 1249 (Alaska), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 , 105 S.Ct. 98 , 83 L.Ed.2d 43 (1984). 1986Federal legislation preempts conflicting state legislation under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. 3 State v. F/V Baranof, 677 P.2d 1245, 1249 (Alaska), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 , 105 S.Ct. 98 , 83 L.Ed.2d 43 (1984).	1	1986–1986
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. green scotus · 1974 2 sentences 1982The plurality opinion in Rosenbloom , which set forth a view which never commanded the support of a majority of the Court, was ultimately rejected in Gertz v. Welch, 418 U.S. 323 , 94 S.Ct. 2997 , 41 L.Ed.2d 789 (1974). 1982The plurality opinion in Rosenbloom , which set forth a view which never commanded the support of a majority of the Court, was ultimately rejected in Gertz v. Welch, 418 U.S. 323 , 94 S.Ct. 2997 , 41 L.Ed.2d 789 (1974).	1	1982–1982
Wissner v. Wissner green scotus · 1950 2 sentences 1979Appellant contends that the treatment of federal military retirement pay as divisible property interferes with the purpose of Congress in enacting the military retirement pay system and that such treatment therefore is prohibited by the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. [2] He bases this argument in part on the United States Supreme Court's decisions in Wissner v. Wissner, 338 U.S. 655 , 70 S.Ct. 398 , 94 L.Ed. 424 (1950) and Free v. Bland, 369 U.S. 663 , 82 S.Ct. 1089 , 8 L.Ed.2d 180 (1962). 1232 In Wissner , a state court ordered the named beneficiary of life insurance pro 1979Appellant contends that the treatment of federal military retirement pay as divisible property interferes with the purpose of Congress in enacting the military retirement pay system and that such treatment therefore is prohibited by the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. [2] He bases this argument in part on the United States Supreme Court's decisions in Wissner v. Wissner, 338 U.S. 655 , 70 S.Ct. 398 , 94 L.Ed. 424 (1950) and Free v. Bland, 369 U.S. 663 , 82 S.Ct. 1089 , 8 L.Ed.2d 180 (1962). 1232 In Wissner , a state court ordered the named beneficiary of life insurance pro	1	1979–1979
Free v. Bland green scotus · 1962 2 sentences 1979Appellant contends that the treatment of federal military retirement pay as divisible property interferes with the purpose of Congress in enacting the military retirement pay system and that such treatment therefore is prohibited by the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. [2] He bases this argument in part on the United States Supreme Court's decisions in Wissner v. Wissner, 338 U.S. 655 , 70 S.Ct. 398 , 94 L.Ed. 424 (1950) and Free v. Bland, 369 U.S. 663 , 82 S.Ct. 1089 , 8 L.Ed.2d 180 (1962). 1232 In Wissner , a state court ordered the named beneficiary of life insurance pro 1979Appellant contends that the treatment of federal military retirement pay as divisible property interferes with the purpose of Congress in enacting the military retirement pay system and that such treatment therefore is prohibited by the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. [2] He bases this argument in part on the United States Supreme Court's decisions in Wissner v. Wissner, 338 U.S. 655 , 70 S.Ct. 398 , 94 L.Ed. 424 (1950) and Free v. Bland, 369 U.S. 663 , 82 S.Ct. 1089 , 8 L.Ed.2d 180 (1962). 1232 In Wissner , a state court ordered the named beneficiary of life insurance pro	1	1979–1979
Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo green scotus · 1979 2 sentences 1979Of major significance is the recent opinion in Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo, - U.S. -, 99 S.Ct. 802 , 59 L.Ed. 1 (1979), which relates to benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act. 1979Of major significance is the recent opinion in Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo, ___ U.S. ___, 99 S.Ct. 802 , 59 L.Ed. 1 (1979), which relates to benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act.	1	1979–1979
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee green · 1816 2 sentences 1970Under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution, 25 this court and every other court in the United States are bound by each and every applicable provision of the United States Constitution. 495 Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, 14 U.S. (1 Wheat.) 304 , 4 L.Ed. 97 (1816). 1970Under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution, 25 this court and every other court in the United States are bound by each and every applicable provision of the United States Constitution. 495 Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, 14 U.S. (1 Wheat.) 304 , 4 L.Ed. 97 (1816).	1	1970–1970

Where else courts name it

CA 325 (1960–2026) IL 147 (1953–2026) WA 58 (1953–2024) NY 55 (1949–2017) TX 51 (1976–2024) CT 49 (1974–2022) NJ 27 (1963–2026) MA 27 (1954–2023) FL 25 (1960–2017) PA 24 (1944–2014) MI 23 (1962–2022) WI 20 (1970–2016) MO 19 (1970–2019) LA 17 (1966–2020) IA 16 (1966–2018) CO 16 (1970–2026) NM 16 (1958–2021) IN 14 (1978–2016) MN 12 (1974–2017) AZ 11 (1970–2022) WV 11 (1987–2026) AR 11 (1988–2025) MD 11 (1965–2021) MT 10 (1979–2009) NV 10 (1965–2019) RI 10 (1945–2015) ID 9 (1974–1988) KS 9 (1981–2026) OH 9 (1948–2017) NE 9 (1983–2017) AK 9 (1970–2003) NC 8 (1950–2022) TN 8 (1956–1993) AL 8 (1964–1995) ND 8 (1979–2015) ME 8 (1970–2011) OK 8 (1979–2020) UT 7 (1976–2017) KY 6 (1980–2026) NH 6 (1948–1995) GA 6 (1981–2024) OR 5 (1973–2024) VA 4 (1991–2009) VT 3 (2000–2014) HI 3 (1980–2017) SC 3 (1989–2021) MS 2 (1966–1970) DC 2 (1981–1992) WY 2 (1985–2003) SD 2 (1985–2010)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check