The question
Whether federal law preempts a soldier's state-law tort claims against a military contractor when the Federal Government neither ordered nor authorized the contractor's challenged conduct.
Hencely v. Fluor Corp.
What the Court decided
The Court reversed the Fourth Circuit and held that Hencely's state-law tort claims against Fluor are not preempted. The Federal Government neither ordered nor authorized Fluor's challenged conduct, and neither the Constitution nor any federal statute expressly preempts the suit. The Court found the Fourth Circuit's reliance on Boyle misplaced because Boyle involved a procurement contract rather than a performance contract and requires a significant conflict between state law and an identifiable federal policy or interest.
How the justices split
6-3The Court's opinion
Thomas, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, Jackson
The Fourth Circuit erred in finding Hencely's claims preempted because the Federal Government neither ordered nor authorized Fluor's conduct. No constitutional provision or federal statute expressly preempts the suit, and the Supremacy Clause requires state law to yield only when it conflicts with the Constitution or a valid federal statute or treaty. The FTCA's combatant-activities exception does not itself apply to suits against federal contractors. Boyle does not support the preemption rule because it involved a procurement contract rather than a performance contract, did not involve the combatant-activities exception, and displaces state law only when there is a significant conflict with an identifiable federal policy or interest.
Dissenting
Alito, joined by Roberts, Kavanaugh
Alito dissented from the Court's conclusion that Hencely's state-law tort claims are not preempted.
How we know · 5 sourced claims
The Fourth Circuit erred in finding Hencely's state-law tort claims preempted where the Federal Government neither ordered nor authorized Fluor's challenged conduct.
Source: syllabus, Held
Neither the Constitution nor any federal statute expressly preempts Hencely's suit.
Source: syllabus, Held
The FTCA's combatant-activities exception does not itself apply to suits against federal contractors, per United States v. Orleans.
Source: syllabus, Held
Boyle recognized displacement of state law only when there is a significant conflict between state law and an identifiable federal policy or interest.
Source: syllabus, Held
Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Jackson; Alito filed a dissent joined by Roberts and Kavanaugh.
Source: syllabus, lineup