Essay on State of Confusion

1735 Words Jul 30th, 2012 7 Pages
State of Confusion
BUS 415
Tanya Trucker, owner of a trucking company in the state of Denial, plans to file suit against the State of Confusion to challenge the State’s new statute requiring all trucks and towing trailers that use their highways to use a B-type truck hitch produced only in Confusion. Although Tanya’s business is located in Denial, she must use Confusion’s highways to conduct business. Tanya must incur additional business costs to comply with Confusion’s statute so her trucks can continue driving through the state. Because the federal government has not made any attempt to regulate the truck hitches used on the nation’s highways, Tanya feels that the statute is a violation of the federal commerce clause, and hopes to
…show more content…
Confusion would have to prove that their B-type hitch statute was enacted for public safety reasons and was not intended to restrict interstate commerce. Considering that the B-type hitch is produced only in Confusion, this would be quite difficult, especially because no other state, or the federal government, has seen it as necessary to make a requirement of the hitches. Under the Commerce Clause, “a state may not go beyond what is essential for self-protection by interfering with interstate transportation into or through its territory” (Farlex, n.d.). However, when Congress enacted the federal Motor Carrier Act of 1980 it also enacted federal statutes that “preempted the regulation of trucking by the states” (Cheeseman, 2010, p. 71). Additionally, under the Supremacy Clause, state and local laws that conflict with federal laws, as does Confusion’s statute, are unconstitutional.
Determining Statute Validity
The federal government regulates interstate commerce and activities that affect interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause. “Under the effects on interstate commerce test, the regulated activity does not itself have to be in interstate commerce. Thus, any local

Related Documents