Williamson v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc. — Sotomayor, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Sotomayor concurred to emphasize that Geier does not stand for the proposition that any agency choice between compliance options pre-empts state tort suits, reasoning that pre-emption requires evidence the agency deliberately sought variety. Thomas concurred in the judgment, arguing the saving clause alone resolves the case and criticizing purposes-and-objectives pre-emption as unconstitutional.