Overview
- The justices heard arguments in Hencely v. Fluor on whether federal wartime interests preempt state-law negligence claims against military contractors.
- Several justices pressed why Boyle should protect a contractor when the conduct allegedly violated military rules and contract terms, with references to regulations that contemplate liability absent specific military control.
- Justice Brett Kavanaugh voiced support for a broader view that state tort law should not apply in a combat zone, while others appeared unconvinced.
- A U.S. Forces-Afghanistan investigation found Fluor provided tools and failed to monitor Afghan employee Ahmad Nayeb, who built a device and killed five during a Veterans Day 5K at Bagram in 2016.
- Lower courts applied Boyle to grant immunity and the plaintiffs’ suits remain stayed, with a Supreme Court ruling expected by early next year.