(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2018 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus VIRGINIA URANIUM, INC., ET AL. v. WARREN ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16–1275. Argued November 5, 2018—Decided June 17, 2019 Petitioner Virginia Uranium, Inc., wants to mine raw uranium ore from a site near Coles Hill, Virginia, but Virginia law flatly prohibits ura- nium mining in the Commonwealth. The company filed suit, alleging that, under the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) preempts state uranium mining laws like Virginia’s and ensconces the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) as the lone regulator in the field. Both the District Court and the Fourth Circuit rejected the company’s argument, finding that while the AEA affords the NRC considerable authority over the nuclear fuel life cycle, it of- fers no hint that Congress sought to strip States of their traditional power to regulate mining on private lands within their borders. Held: The judgment is affirmed. 848 F. 3d 590, affirmed. JUSTICE GORSUCH, joined by JUSTICE THOMAS and JUSTICE KA- VANAUGH, concluded that the AEA does not preempt Virginia’s law banning uranium mining. Pp. 3–17. (a) Virginia Uranium claims that the AEA is best read to reserve to the NRC alone the regulation of uranium mining based on nuclear safety concerns. But the AEA contains no provision expressly preempting state law. More pointedly, it grants the NRC extensive and sometimes exclusive authority to regulate nearly every aspect of the nuclear fuel life cycle except mining, expressly stating that the NRC’s regulatory powers arise only “after [uranium’s] removal from its place of deposit in nature,” 42 U. S. C. §2092. And statutory con- text confirms this reading: If the federal government wants to control uranium mining on private land, it must purchase or seize the land by eminent domain and make it federal land, §2096, indicating that 2 VIRGINIA URANIUM, INC. v. WARREN Syllabus state authority remains untouched. Later amendments to the AEA point to the same conclusion. Section 2021 allows the NRC to devolve certain of its regulatory powers to the States but does nothing to ex- tend the NRC’s power to activities, like mining, historically beyond its reach. And §2021(k) explains that States remain free to regulate the activities discussed in §2021 for purposes other than nuclear safety without the NRC’s consent. Virginia Uranium contends in- stead that subsection (k) greatly expands the AEA’s preemptive effect by demanding the displacement of any state law enacted for the pur- pose of protection the public against “radiation hazards.” But subsec- tion (k) merely clarifies ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals