case, as it was in Palumbo, is between two federal statutes rather than one federal and one state. The Seventh Circuit explained the importance of this distinction by noting that “[t]he intersection of, or potential conflict between, federal statutes does not implicate the constitutional concerns underlying [the] Garmon preemption.” Id. The court further advised that when making this determination, a court should consider “principles of statutory construction and interpretation, as well as the underlying statutory policies and congressional intentions ... because fundamentally each federal statute has equal effect under the law.” Id. “Congressional intent behind one federal statute should not be , 1447 (5th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 960, 113 S.Ct. 2929, 124 L.Ed.2d 679 (1993) (<HOLDING>). Pursuant to this analysis, civil RICO charges
holding age discrimination claim barred holding that a claim for discrimination in private employment is not preempted by title vii holding that the age discrimination in employment act was not preempted by the nlra recognizing equitable nature of back pay award under age discrimination in employment act holding that claims arising under the age discrimination in employment act may be subject to arbitration