The State of Confusio

The State of Confusion

Dianne Whitney

BUS/415

January 6, 2011

Raymond Headings

The State of Confusion

The state of Confusion has enacted a statute that requires all trucks and towing trailers that use its state and federal highways to use a certain type of truck hitch. These B-type hitches are only produced and available for purchase in the state of Confusion. Ms Tanya Tucker, owner of a trucking company from the state of Denial intends to file suit against the statute.

What court will have jurisdiction over Tanya’s suit? Why?

Ms. Tanya Tucker, owner of a trucking company from the state of Denial should file suit against the statute at the district court level. She could file at the state level, but because she is seeking an interpretation of the commerce clause of the federal constitution the district court s\would provide the best option. The federal courts are the final word on ascertaining any impact of the federal constitution. Also, a state court could have a predisposition to uphold their state law.

Is the Confusion statute constitutional? Discuss your legal reasoning.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3, of the Constitution of the United States, states that the federal government may regulate commerce in order to ensure that all interstate commerce is free from local restraints forced by various states that openly inhibit interstate commerce. All trucks and towing trailers passing through the state of Confusion are made to suffer the undue hardship of having the vehicle fitted with a B-type hitch which is produced by only one manufacturer in Confusion. The time and expense incurred by the trucking company transporting goods through Confusion clearly restricts the free flow of interstate trade through Confusion. In order for the trucks to avoid the hardship imposed by the statute, additional time and expense would also be added to avoid entering or passing through the state.

What provisions of the U.S. Constitution will be applied by a...