Treaties and the Constitution

Case: Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council (2000; US)

Facts: In 1996, MA adopted an act regulating business with or in Burma, which

generally barred state entities from buying goods or services from any person
doing business with Burma. Three months later, Congress passed a statute imposing
a set of mandatory and conditional sanctions on Burma. This was done to compel
Burma to improve their human rights practices and implement a democratic gov't.

Issue: Whether the MA act can be enforceable when there is a federal act of the
same nature, but with conflicting terms. -No.

Holding: The application of MA's act is unconstitutional under the Supremacy

clause.

Reasoning:
• Congress has the power to preempt state law. Even with an express provision for
preemption, state law must yield to a congressional Act in at least 2
circumstances:
○ When congress intends to occupy the field, then state law is preempted.
○ State law is naturally preempted to the extent of any conflict with a
federal statute.
• The Court reasoned that the U.S. Congress had passed a law imposing sanctions on
Burma, and that the Massachusetts law undermined the intended purpose and 'natural
effect' of at least three provisions of the federal Act, that is:
○ its delegation of effective discretion to the President to control
economic sanctions against Burma,
○ its limitation of sanctions solely to United States persons and new
investment, and
○ its directive to the President to proceed diplomatically in developing a
comprehensive, multilateral strategy towards Burma.
• Thus, it is clear the state act stands in the way of Congress's objectives.

Notes

• Both fed and state law seek to punish Burma for human rights violations
○ But 2 laws are not coextensive
§ MA law harsher
§ Constitution gives president the authority to represent external
affairs
• Corporation say MA law is invalid b/c it conflicts with fed law, b/c fed law
trumps it
• Preemption doctrine helps us understand the supremacy clause - when does fed law
trump state law?
○ Express preemption - where states explicitly that it preempts state law
○ Implicit preemption
§ Field - Where intention of congress was to monopolize the entire
field
§ Where state law conflicts with fed law