Why It Matters
The Trump administration's deregulatory moves at the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) have sharpened a long-running legal question over how far the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (ADA) can block states from regulating airlines, according to a new Congressional Research Service (CRS) report.
DOT withdrew an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on airline passenger rights in November 2025, and in July issued a proposed rule to amend its air-fare advertising requirements.
The ADA's preemption provision bars states from enacting or enforcing any law "related to a price, route, or service" of an air carrier, a phrase the Supreme Court has read broadly enough to reach generally applicable state laws that only indirectly affect airlines. Courts have nonetheless limited preemption where a state law's effect is "too tenuous, remote, or peripheral," making the analysis fact-intensive and case-by-case.
The Big Picture
Congress enacted the ADA to place "maximum reliance on competitive market forces" and encourage competition to deliver efficiency, innovation, and lower prices, replacing close federal regulation of carrier prices, routes, and services under the Federal Aviation Act of 1958.
The preemption provision, codified at 49 U.S.C. § 41713(b)(1), covers any state law with a "reference to" or "connection with" airline prices, routes, or services. Federal appeals courts are split on whether "service" covers amenities such as boarding procedures, baggage handling, and in-flight food and drink. Most circuits read "service" broadly to include such amenities, while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit limits the term to prices, schedules, origins, and destinations.
The Supreme Court has addressed the provision in several landmark cases:
- In Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., the Court held the ADA preempted state consumer protection statutes used to police airline fare advertising.
- In American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens, the Court held the ADA preempted state consumer fraud claims but not breach-of-contract claims enforcing an airline's own voluntarily adopted terms.
- In Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg, the Court unanimously held the ADA preempts state contract claims that seek to enlarge obligations the parties voluntarily adopted.
The National Association of Attorneys General wrote to Congress in 2022 arguing DOT does not adequately protect airline consumers and that states should be authorized to enforce consumer protection laws against airlines. An airline industry group has argued, in contrast, that broad preemption "has helped create a cost-effective and efficient transportation network throughout the United States."
The Bottom Line
Congress may choose to monitor how courts apply the ADA's preemption provision and could amend it to narrow, expand, or clarify its scope, the report concludes.
Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights
Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article
