Can't it be argued that SCOTUS's positions: 1. FAA is less broad than NRLA 2. NRLA does not override anything in FAA due to it being overbroad and/or things i

Can't it be argued that SCOTUS's positions: 1. FAA is less broad than NRLA 2. NRLA does not override anything in FAA due to it being overbroad and/or things in the FAA not being "common policy" are false, and thus the law on the books is not being respected? #1 appears to be false and #2 is based on their erroneous position in #1. NRLA is more targeted than FAA and came 10 years post-FAA, so the argument that things covered in the FAA were not "common policy" at the time NRLA became law and thus wouldn't be overridden by NRLA seem ridiculous to me