Hencely v. Fluor Corp. · ¶26

Boyle was clear that the identification of a uniquely federal interest “does not, however, end the inquiry.” Id., at 507. Instead, this Court's precedents require “a significant confict . . . between an identifable federal policy or interest and the operation of state law.” Ibid. (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted).

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