摘要：Professor Cramton discusses Pennsylvania v. Nelson, as an example of the Supreme Court's jurisprudence in preemption over sedition crimes. Nelson was decided incorrectly, relying on a vague test and ignoring plain language. The Court is making policy decisions when it determines preemption cases, an act Professor Cramton argues is inappropriate. Professor Crampton analyzes the relationship between state and federal laws through the lens of sedition and the Communist Party. First, he criticizes the
