Summary

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart Federal Trade Commission v. Travelers Health Association…

Yet the Court now finds it offensive to the concept of the statute to consider that other States may be content to rely on Nebraska's regulation of advertising material mailed to their citizens by Nebraska insurance companies. The Court reserves 'for what they are worth' the questions that would arise were such other States to legislate against the out-of-state mailing of insurance advertising into their jurisdictions.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart Federal Trade Commission v. Travelers Health Association…

In this case the state regulation relied on to displace the federal law is not the protective legislation of the States whose citizens are the targets of the advertising practices in question. Rather, we are asked to hold that the McCarran-Ferguson Act operates to oust the Commission of jurisdiction by reason of a single State's attempted regulation of its domiciliary's extraterritorial activities. [3] But we cannot believe that this kind of law of a single State takes from the residents of every other State the protection of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart Federal Trade Commission v. Travelers Health Association…

One innovation with the Act is apt to lead to another, and may ultimately result in a hybrid scheme of insurance regulation, bringing about uncertainties and possible duplications which should be avoided.
'Obviously Congress' purpose was broadly to give support to the existing and future state systems for regulating and taxing the business of insurance.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature