Con: Dormant Commerce Clause (implied restriction from the commerce clause…
Con: Dormant Commerce Clause
implied restriction from the commerce clause. When a state or local action affects interstate commerce, under the DCC the judiciary determines whether a state or local statute or action violates an implicit limitation of the commerce clause, which forbids states from economically discriminating against out of staters
Gibbons: Strict Expansive view. no state ought to pass legislation that collides or affects interstate commerce.
Willson: states can pass laws that
collides w/ interstate commerce in the ordinary exercise of their police power.
when they desire to promote the health and safety of its residents rather than to discriminate interstate commerce.
Modern Trend: Cooley: regulation on matters are local v. national.
direct impact on interstate commerce was not permissible and indirect effect originally was.
discriminatory in its face
= rational basis: if they are rationally related to a legitimate state goal (promoting general welfare are a legitimate end) W/S/H or is it prohibiting one economic store and not others in the same state
laws designed to protect or promote economic prospect of intestate residents at the expense of out of state residents are illegitimate goal will be struck down UNLESS
Only way a facially discriminatory measure survives =
the state must overcome a form of strict scrutiny to show that it has a NECESSARY legitimate purpose and that the purpose cannot be accomplished by less discriminatory means (infected goods).
even if its on its face = what is the true intent. no state will confess designing law for economic purpose
Congress allows state to discriminate
Phili law req boats to hire a local pilot. state law was upheld b/c of state v. national effect.
DL state license for dam collided w/ federal law. DL desire was to promote the health and safety of their residents and its objective was not against the fed gov.
neutral balancing test: if burden on intestate commerce outweighs the state's interest= unconstitutional ...where a statute regulates even handednly to affectuate a legitimate gov. interest and its effect is only incidental = it will get upheld =
unless its really excessive in relation to its effect and where means are not necessary and there are other alternatives.
States may not violate interstate commerce against out of staters, out of towners , unduly and burderson tax, or to keep goods inside state, or excessively protect environment. =
market participant = exception when a state behaves as an ordinary buyer or seller it may discriminate.
a state may contract on any terms it wishes when participating w/in a market even terms that discriminate w/out violating DCC
Unless it additionally uses its tax power when buying or selling as a normal merchant OR goes into a different market (sells and then enters production in same law)
Congress approves statutes that otherwise would be prohibited
NY license for steamboats collided w. a prior federal license. Federal supremacy req state law to be invalidated
IV Privileges & Immunities Clause
forbids states from discriminating, punishing, or depriving citizens from other states of their fundamental rights protected under the constitution.
Purpose is to prevent states from placing an unreasonable burden on noncitizens
an individual must show that an economic right or fundamental right has been denied (ability to earn a livelihood v. recreational hunting license)
unless it can be shown that
there is a substantial narrowly tailored reason for the difference (mother nature)
the states is disriminating b/c the discrimination bears a substantial relationship to an important state's objective. intermediate scrutiny
unless there are less restrictive means available