Commerce Clause: State of Alpha

Consider Commerce Clause, Dormant Commerce Clause, Supremacy & Preemption issues

Golden is a privately-owned company engaged in the business of disposing toxic waste generated by mining companies. Golden operates pursuant to a license issued by the state of Alpha. This license authorizes Golden to contract with miners to provide the following services: (i) collection of toxic waste at mine sites, and (ii) transportation of that waste to Golden’s disposal station, which is in the State of Alpha, three miles from the border with the state of Beta.

In accordance with the authority granted by its license for the past 10 years Golden has contracted to provide services to miners in Alpha. Recently, Golden expanded its business to serve the miners in Beta and the emerging battery businesses across the border in Beta.

Shortly after Golden extended its services to the Beta miners and plants, the residents of the town from which the toxic waste disposal station operates started complaining about the rash of skin irritations, and increased illness.

Prior to Golden’s expansion of service to the State of Beta miners and the battery business, the U.S. Congress has passed legislation promulgating standards for safe disposal of toxic materials including batteries.

The residents petitioned the State of Alpha to close Golden’s disposal station. Golden objected. The Commissioner held open hearings. Following the hearings, the state issued an order that the use of Golden’s disposal station would be limited to toxic waste from Alpha miners only. The Beta miners and battery businesses were barred from disposing of their toxic waste through Golden.

Both Golden and the State of Beta have filed suit against State of Alpha seeking to rescind the order. Develop a F-IRAC for the constitutional legal issues related to the Commerce Clause, the Dormant Commerce Clause, Supremacy and Preemption.

POST: Provide an introductory paragraph which provides a summary of the fact pattern in your own words. Then in a second paragraph properly identify the ISSUE: in a single sentence written as a question.

The issue statement wants to identify the parties to the suit, the legal theory in question, and a brief fact leading to the dispute or suit. Because this is a Constitutional law case the source of the law providing protection or establishing parameters must be made clear in the Issue itself. This is always done by referencing the Article in the U.S. Constitution or the Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which become the basis of the analysis later on. As you have hopefully noted in your readings, these issues are often voiced in expressions of “has (a government) violated someone’s constitutionally guarantee right” or does the U.S. constitution guarantee…..The part of this statement is the singular fact that might have violated the constitutional right and gives rise to the question.

Here is a silly, and unrelated example of language: Did the State of Zanzabar violate Johnathan’s right to smoke dope as guaranteed in the Universal Minutes of Freedom when it removed all dope smoking benches in the intergalactic flight to goon-land.

Before writing your reply return to the text and other resources available in Canvas and make sure you understand the rules of law, which in turn helps you understand the issue. This is an important part of your learning process and allows you to question your own work. After having critically though about the post your are reviewing offer suggestions for improvement being sure to explain the reason for the need to improve and the reason for the approach to improvement. Then, rewrite the post following your own suggestion: here a suggested format would look like this:

Jessica, Good first draft. I have returned to our readings and on a closer look think that there is no right to small dope guaranteed in the Universal Minutes of Freedom, rather there is only the right to talk about smoking dope guaranteed in those minutes. I also think in the issue statement we should use the full name of the State as it is an introduction of the parties. Continuing with my silly example, I would rewrite it like this: Did the State of Zanzabar the Lesser violate Johnathan’s right to smoke….. or maybe approach it this way because I am not certain of the guarantee. Do the Universal Minutes of Freedom guarantee Johnathan the right to smoke dope which the State of Zanzabar the Lesser violated when it………

You have in your post clearly identified the parties involved Johnathan, and the State of Zanzabar [the Lesser}. You have provided the source of the guarantee…Universal Minutes of Freedom. but I think there is some confusion regarding the nature of the guarantee which can be clarified.

————————————————————

Everything you need to know is in the above text. Please mare sure you follow the bolded part where it says POST, that’s basically your assignment. Let me know if you need anything. This assignment should only be about 2 solid paragraphs.