Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc.
489 U.S. 141 · Decided February 21, 1989 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc. was decided on February 21, 1989 unanimously (9–0). The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Federal preemption of state legislation or regulation” in the Federalism area. SCDB records that the Court declared a state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 489 U.S. 141 · 109 S. Ct. 971 · 103 L. Ed. 2d 118 · 1989 U.S. LEXIS 629
- Docket number
- 87-1346
- Decided
- February 21, 1989
- Argued
- December 5, 1988
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Sandra Day O'Connor
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue area
- Federalism
- Legal provision
- Article VI, Section 2 (supremacy clause)
- Type of law
- Constitution
- Held unconstitutional
- A state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority |
Full case caption
Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc.
SCDB identifiers: case 1988-034, docket 1988-034-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Federal preemption of state legislation or regulation”
- Volt Information Sciences, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University
- California v. Arc America Corp.
- Mansell v. Mansell
- Shell Oil Company v. Iowa Department of Revenue
- Felder v. Casey
- Mackey v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc.
Cases on the same legal provision: Article VI, Section 2 (supremacy clause)
- Northwest Central Pipeline Corp. v. State Corporation Commission of Kansas
- George S. Bennett v. ArkansasLaw held unconstitutional
- Mark Howlett v. Scott Rose
- Rose v. Rose
- Rose v. Arkansas State PoliceLaw held unconstitutional
- Lawrence County v. Lead-Deadwood School District No. 40-1Law held unconstitutional
Same Term, same area (Federalism)
- Shell Oil Company v. Iowa Department of Revenue
- Volt Information Sciences, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University
- Davis v. Michigan Department of the TreasuryLaw held unconstitutional
- Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Graham
- California v. Arc America Corp.
- Mansell v. Mansell
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error