State of Confusion Paper
State of Confusion Paper
State of Confusion Paper
BUS 415
April 25, 2011
State of Confusion
Background
The state of Confusion enacted a statute requiring all trucks and towing trailers that use its highways to use a B-type truck hitch. This hitch is manufactured by only one manufacturer in Confusion. The result of this statute is that any trucker who wants to drive through Confusion must stop and have the new hitch installed, or drive around Confusion. The federal government has not made any attempt to regulate the truck hitches used on the nations highways. Tanya Trucker, who owns a trucking company in the state of Denial, is not happy about the additional expense this statute imposes on her business. She intends to file suit against Confusion to overturn the statute.
Court to file in
Tanya is seeking to file suit because of the additional expenses the statue imposes on her business and others like her. The suit should be filed in the federal District Court. The federal District Courts are empowered to impanel juries, receive evidence, hear testimony, and decide cases. Most federal cases originate in federal District Courts (Chesseman, 2010, p. 36). Under the commerce clause Tanya would be able to fight for unconstitutional state law which requires unnecessary equipment to travel on the highway which could cause hazardous conditions and also allow other states to enact their own statues making the trucking business harder to perform from state to state.
The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power “to regulate Commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with Indian tribes.”6 Because this clause authorizes the federal government to regulate commerce, it has a greater impact on business than does any other provision in the Constitution (Cheeseman, 2010, p.71).
Statue Legality
The U.S. Congress enacted the federal Motor Carrier Act of 1980 to deregulate the trucking industry and make it competitively market oriented. In addition, Congress enacted two other federal statutes that preempted the regulation of trucking by the states (Cheeseman, 2010, p. 71). The statute is unconstitutional since it makes a product needed that is only available through one obtainable source. This effect would cause chaotic trucking across the different states since each state would enact their own statue making businesses need specific product to travel on the different highways.
U. S. Constitution
Under the Constitution Tanyas business is protect by “Unduly burden interstate commerce a concept which says that states may enact laws that protect or promote the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare, as long as the law does not unduly burden interstate commerce (Cheeseman, 2010, p. 73).”
Many things