..."[W]e start with the assumption that the historic police powers of the State were not to be superceded by the Federal Act unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress. "5s/ It is clear that Congress has the authority to confer on the states authority that they...

...between state insurance laws and the SEC tender offer rules is rendered unnecessary by McCarran-Ferguson. "[W]e start with the assumption that the historic police powers of the State were not to be superceded by the Federal Act unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of...

...state law. In considering the latter question "'we start with the assumption that the historic public powers of the States were not to be superseded by...unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.1" Jones v. Rath Packing Co., 430 US 519, 525 (1977) (quoting Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.,...

...challenged under the Supremacy Clause, 'we start with the assumption that the historic police powerr of the States were not to be superseded by the Federal Act unless that was the clear ard manifest purpose of Corgress.'" P.ay v. Atlantic Richfield Co. , 435 US 151, 157 (1978), quoting...

...expressed It, the starting point for determining whether state law has been supplanted by federal law is "the assumption that the historic police powers of the States were not to be superseded . . . unless that was the clear and manifest 3V purpose of Congress." 291 Milwaukee II, 451 US at 317....

...date, the Justices unanimously articulated this presumption as follows: As we have repeatedly stated, "we start with the assumption that the historic police...unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress." Puerto Rico Department of Consumer Affairs v. Isla Petroleum Corporation, 56 USLW 4307,...

...federal review through RICO of state regulatory decision« i« inappropriate. The Supreme Court has said that when Congress legislates in a field traditionally...unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.' This assumption provides assurance that - 45 'the federal-state balance' will not be disturbed...

...federal review through RICO of state regulatory decision* is inappropriate. The Supreme Court has said that when Congress legislates in a field traditionally...unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.1 This assumption provide* assurance that - 45 'the federal-state balance1 will not be disturbed...

...a field where there is a long-standing history of state regulation, there is a presumption that the "powers of the States were not to be superseded by...unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.") See United States v. Emmons. 410 US 396, 411 (1973); United States v. Bass. 404 US 336,...

...interests. The general rule of construction is that "the historic police powers of the States [are] not to be superseded by the Federal Act unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress." Jones v. Rath Packing Co.. 430 US 519,, 525, 51 L.Ed.2d 604, 614 (quoting Rice v. Santa...