In an action claiming that certain state fair-lending laws were preempted by the National Bank Act (NBA) and accompanying regulations, an injunction in favor of Plaintiffs is affirmed in part, where the state's threatened issuance of executive subpoenas was an improper exercise of "supervisory power". However, the judgment is reversed in part where a federal regulation purporting to pre-empt state law enforcement is not a reasonable interpretation of the NBA.
Argued April 28, 2009
Decided June 29, 2009
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.
Justice Thomas, concurring in part and dissenting in part.
Attorneys for Petitioner:
Attorneys for Respondents:
Elena Kagan, Solicitor General, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC