Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-404_i5ea.pdf
Page Number: 4

Cite as:  596 U. S. ____ (2022) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to 
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that 
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 21–404 
_________________ 

UNITED STATES, PETITIONER v. 
WASHINGTON, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

[June 21, 2022] 

JUSTICE BREYER delivered the opinion of the Court. 
The Constitution’s Supremacy Clause generally immun-
izes the Federal Government from state laws that directly
regulate or discriminate against it.  See South Carolina v. 
Baker, 485 U. S. 505, 523 (1988).  Congress, however, can
authorize such laws by waiving this constitutional immun-
ity.  See Goodyear Atomic Corp. v. Miller, 486 U. S. 174, 180 
(1988).

This  case  concerns  state  workers’  compensation  laws. 
Congress  has  enacted  a  statute  that  waives  the  Federal 
Government’s  constitutional  immunity  insofar  as  a  “state
authority  charged  with  enforcing  . . .  the  state  workers’ 
compensation laws . . . appl[ies] the laws” to land or projects 
“belonging to the [Federal] Government, in the same way 
and to the same extent as if the premises were under the
exclusive jurisdiction of the State.”  40 U. S. C. §3172(a).

The  question  before  us  is  whether  a  Washington  State
workers’  compensation  law  falls  within  the  scope  of  this 
congressional waiver.  The state law, by its terms, applies
only to federal workers who work at one federal facility in 
Washington.  The law makes it easier for these workers to