Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish · ¶49

First, the Fifth Circuit reasoned that Chevron's refning contract did not specify how to obtain or produce crude oil, so Chevron's crude-oil production was unrelated to the performance of its federal refning duties. 103 F. 4th, at 341. But, the ordinary meaning of “relating to” does not require the defendant to show that his federal duties specifically invited his challenged conduct. See, supra, at 11–12. For example, we have held in the preemption context that a state law can “relate to” benefit plans even when the law was “not specifically designed to affect such plans.” Ingersoll- Rand, 498 U. S., at 139. Likewise, Chevron's contract did not have to expressly direct or invite Chevron's crude-oil production for that conduct to “relate to” its avgas refning.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.