Argument of Justice Kennedy
Mr. Kennedy: The first one is United States against Locke, No.98-1701.
Concerned about oil spills which could be catastrophic for its sea coasts and inland waters, the state of Washington has enacted comprehensive laws seeking to regulate oil tankers entering its waters.
These waters include Puget Sound in the Strait of San Juan de Fuca, which is the way you get from the Pacific Ocean into Puget Sound.
In 1978, in a case called Ray versus Atlantic Richfield, the Court held with certain laws enacted by Washington to regulate tankers, were preempted by federal laws.
This case involves laws regulating tankers that Washington enacted well after our decision in Ray.
The District Court and the Court of Appeals to the Ninth Circuit upheld all but one of Washington's new laws.
In an opinion for the Court authored by Justice Kennedy, we now reverse them of the Ninth Circuit.
The court's opinion reaffirmed that general analytical structure in the essential holding of the Ray case.
In light of an established federal and international regulatory scheme, we hold that various Washington laws discussed in the opinion are preempted.
Preemption principles respect the established federal state balance in matters of Maritime Commerce.
That balance recognizes subjects as to which the states retain concurrent powers and those that were which the federal authority displaces state control.
The opinion discusses in detail for separate Washington tanker rules, all of which we find to be preempted by Federal Law.
The petitioners have argued that other Washington tanker rule should be declared preempted as well.
These questions we leave to the Court of Appeals or to the District Court for further proceedings on remand.
The judgment of Court of Appeals is reversed.
The opinion of the Court is unanimous.
