Ahh, to be a "principled" conservative yet an advocate of sweeping federal preemption.
On the one hand, you believe to the core of your Dixie heart in "State's Rights" and abhor regulations and the steady encroachment of federal tyranny.
You believe an incompetent Congress frequently overreaches at the expense of the "incubators of democracy" -- the various States and their locally
On the other hand, when a mega corporation wants relief from the imposition of state laws and state juries who sometimes impose local standards of conduct in evaluating liability and damages, in walks the happy notion that the federal government and their massive regulatory scheme occupies the entire field of [insert subject of lawsuit here] and the world is DC's -- you just live in it (plus your butt is out of Court).
Wow, how'd I wind up ranting on such a pleasant Friday?
We merely conclude that, having surveyed both federal and state law, it is clear that Congress would have intended to preempt Graham’s strict-liability and negligence claims, rooted as they are in the Engle jury findings, which have been interpreted by the Florida courts to possess unprecedented breadth. We express no opinion as to other state-law suits that may rest on significantly narrower theories of liability than the Engle litigation.Right, we "merely conclude" that this whole legal cottage industry spawned by Engle is dead (no offense, deceased tobacco smokers).
What are all my wacky tobacky friends at Shook Hardy Miami going to do now? Change departments?
(Medical device and prescription drug claims are subject to preemption attacks too!)