Whether the Railway Labor Act preempts state-law claims against a third party that cannot be resolved without interpreting a collective bargaining agreement between an airline and its employees

Congress enacted the Railw ay Labor Act (RLA), 45 U.S.C. §151 et seq. , to govern “all disputes” arising out of “the interpretation or application of” collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) in the railroad and airline industries. Id. §151a. For decades, state and federal courts have recognized “where the resolution of a state-law claim depends on an interpretation of the CBA, the claim is pre-empted.” Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. v. Norris , 512 U.S. 246, 261 (1994). But here, the courts below disregarded that rule for certain statelaw claims asserted agai nst third parties—rather than signatories—to a CBA. In doing so, these courts departed from core principles of preemption and created a sharp split with courts across the country, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Question Presented is: Whether the Railway Labor Act preempts statelaw claims against a third party that cannot be resolved without interpreting a collective bargaining agreement between an airline and its employees.