The Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp. case in 1983 revolved around the issue of nuclear safety and state versus federal jurisdiction over punitive damages for a nuclear incident. Karen Silkwood, an employee at a plutonium production plant owned by Kerr-McGee Corporation, was contaminated with radioactive material from the plant under suspicious circumstances; she died in a car accident while on her way to meet with a reporter to discuss safety issues at the facility. Her father sued Kerr-McGee for negligence leading to her contamination and death, seeking actual and punitive damages. The Supreme Court ruled that states have authority over awarding punitive damages arising from nuclear incidents despite federal regulation of nuclear safety through the Price-Anderson Act (PAA). The court held that PAA did not preempt state law remedies such as punitive damage awards because it didn't express clear intent to do so nor did it conflict with or pose obstacles towards achieving Congress's objectives within PAA.

In the Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp case, the dissenting opinion argued that federal law should preempt state tort law in matters of nuclear safety regulation. The minority justices believed that Congress intended to create a comprehensive and exclusive regulatory framework for nuclear safety through the Atomic Energy Act (AEA). They contended that allowing individual states to impose additional punitive damages could disrupt this uniform system and potentially hinder national efforts towards atomic energy development. Moreover, they expressed concern about juries lacking technical expertise making decisions on complex issues related to nuclear safety. Therefore, while acknowledging Karen Silkwood's tragic death due to radioactive contamination, they maintained it was not within their purview as Supreme Court Justices to provide remedy or relief outside what is prescribed by federal laws.