Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Dormant Commerce Clause, or Negative Commerce Clause, in American constitutional law, is a legal doctrine that courts in the United States have inferred from the Commerce Clause in Article I of the US Constitution. [1]
Commerce Clause, Dormant Commerce Clause Reading Railroad Co. v. Pennsylvania , 82 U.S. (15 Wall.) 232 (1872), often known as the State Freight Tax Case , was a U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled that the state of Pennsylvania violated the U.S. Constitution by imposing unjust taxes on interstate commerce .
Clause Name Article Section Clause 1808 Clause [citation needed] I: 9: 1 Admissions Clause: IV: 3: 1 Advice and Consent Clause: II: 2: 2 Appointments Clause: II: 2: 2 Apportionment of Representatives and Taxes Clause: I: 2: 3 Arisings Clause [citation needed] III: 2: 1 Basket Clause: I: 8: 18 Case or Controversy Clause: III: 2: 1 Coefficient ...
Dormant Commerce Clause Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management Authority , 550 U.S. 330 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case about interstate commerce . Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion of the Court, holding that New York county ordinances forcing private waste management companies to deliver waste to a public facility did ...
The significance of the Commerce Clause is described in the Supreme Court's opinion in Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005): [7] [8] The Commerce Clause emerged as the Framers' response to the central problem giving rise to the Constitution itself: the absence of any federal commerce power under the Articles of Confederation.
State statutes that have a negative effect on interstate commerce are unconstitutional under the Dormant Commerce Clause.Justice Stewart used a balancing test.. Where the statute regulates evenhandedly to effectuate a legitimate local public interest, and its effects on interstate commerce are only incidental, it will be upheld unless the burden imposed on such commerce is clearly excessive in ...
The challengers, including Exxon, claimed that the law violated the Dormant Commerce Clause. Justice Stevens wrote for the majority, which disagreed with Exxon et al.: "Since Maryland's entire gasoline supply flows in interstate commerce and since there are no local producers or refiners, such claims of disparate treatment between interstate ...
I § 8 cl. 3 (Commerce Clause), Dormant Commerce Clause Oregon Waste Systems, Inc. v. Department of Environmental Quality of Oregon , 511 U.S. 93 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court decision focused on the aspect of state power and the interpretation of the Commerce Clause as a limitation on states' regulatory power.