Under the Dormant Commerce Clause, state laws that discriminate against interstate commerce are invalid unless what.

Under the Dormant Commerce Clause, state laws that discriminate against interstate commerce are invalid unless what.

• A. State laws discriminate against interstate commerce are invalid unless the law serves a legitimate local interest and is not discriminatory.
• B. State laws discriminate against interstate commerce are always valid.
• C. Interstate commerce is not implicated in the Dormant Commerce Clause.
• D. Only federal laws can regulate commerce.

Answer: (A)

The Dormant Commerce Clause blocks states from enacting laws that discriminate against out-of-state interests in order to protect local economic interests. The permissible path is when a state law, while targeting a local concern, is not designed to favor in-state over out-of-state interests and serves a legitimate local objective. If a law is truly discriminatory against interstate commerce, it will generally be invalid unless it can be shown to pursue a legitimate local goal and be so tightly tailored that it doesn’t discriminate in its application. So, the best answer reflects that a state-law distinction against interstate commerce is invalid unless the measure serves a legitimate local interest and is not discriminatory toward out-of-state interests, meaning the local objective is legitimate and the law isn’t used to advantage local businesses at the expense of others.

The Dormant Commerce Clause blocks states from enacting laws that discriminate against out-of-state interests in order to protect local economic interests. The permissible path is when a state law, while targeting a local concern, is not designed to favor in-state over out-of-state interests and serves a legitimate local objective. If a law is truly discriminatory against interstate commerce, it will generally be invalid unless it can be shown to pursue a legitimate local goal and be so tightly tailored that it doesn’t discriminate in its application.

So, the best answer reflects that a state-law distinction against interstate commerce is invalid unless the measure serves a legitimate local interest and is not discriminatory toward out-of-state interests, meaning the local objective is legitimate and the law isn’t used to advantage local businesses at the expense of others.