Swift & Co. v. Wickham

Background

Two large meat-packing companies that stuff, freeze, and ship turkeys nationwide challenged a New York rule requiring labels to show both the stuffed and unstuffed weight of packaged turkeys. The companies said federal poultry law and federal labeling regulations control weight labels, and the Federal Department of Agriculture refused to let them change labels to meet New York’s demand. They sued to stop New York from enforcing its rule, and a three-judge federal court was convened but then questioned whether a three-judge panel was required.

Reasoning

The Court examined when a three-judge district court must hear a case seeking to block a state law as unconstitutional. It concluded that longstanding cases holding suits that rest only on a conflict between state and federal statutes do not require three judges should control. The majority found the prior Kesler test — which turned on how much statutory interpretation was needed — unworkable and returned to the earlier rule that preemption-by-federal-law claims are handled in the ordinary single-judge forum. The Court therefore held a three-judge court was not required and dismissed the direct appeal, leaving appeals to the Court of Appeals.

Real world impact

Businesses challenging state rules as conflicting with federal statutes will generally proceed in single-judge district courts and then to the courts of appeals, not directly to this Court. The decision reduces the situations in which three-judge panels sit and narrows immediate Supreme Court review of these disputes.

Dissents or concurrances

A dissent argued Kesler should stand and that Congress intended important state-federal conflicts to be decided by three judges, to avoid a single judge voiding state laws.