18 U.S.C. § 233
Preemption
Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of Congress to occupy the field in which any provisions of the chapter operate to the exclusion of State or local laws on the same subject matter, nor shall any provision of this chapter be construed to invalidate any provision of State law unless such provision is inconsistent with any of the purposes of this chapter or any provision thereof.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1969–2026 · leading case: Est. of Ungar Ex Rel. Strachman v. Palestinian Auth., 304 F. Supp. 2d 232 (D.R.I. 2004).
Est. of Ungar Ex Rel. Strachman v. Palestinian Auth., 304 F. Supp. 2d 232 (D.R.I. 2004). “Attorney’s Fees Plaintiffs have submitted an Affidavit of Counsel Fees and Costs Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 233 (a), seeking $67,421.25 in attorney’s fees for 299.”
United States v. Donald Lavern Culbert, 548 F.2d 1355 (9th Cir. 1977). “18 U.S.C. § 233 is a good example. “Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of Congress to occupy the field in which any provisions of the chapter operate to the exclusion of State or local laws on the same subject matter, nor…”
United States v. Borys, 18 C.M.A. 547 (1969). “18 USC § 233 . As a matter of. - policy, the Army has cautioned against military prosecution of the same act over which a “civil court has exercised jurisdiction.”
In re Chiquita Brands Int'l, Inc. Alien Tort Statute & Shareholder Derivative Litig., 270 F. Supp. 3d 1332 (S.D. Fla. 2017). “Plaintiffs contend that Chiquita was successful in achieving leniency: While the Government originally proposed requiring Chiquita to plead guilty to both 18 U.S.C. § 233 9B (providing material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization) and 18 U.”
Kurtz, No. 3:25-cv-00692 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 22, 2026). “On October 3, 2025, the Honorable Therese Wiley Dancks, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report-Recommendation and Order recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff’s IFP Application, dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint, and deny Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.