State of Confusion

State Confusion

The state of Confusions sanction a statute that requires all truckers to obtain a type-B trailer hitch manufactured only in Confusion. A trucker that wishes not to obtain the mandated trailer hitch, they must seek another alternative route. In the state of Denial, Tanya Trucker owns a trucking company. This prompted her to file a lawsuit against Confusion in an attempt to overturn the statute. She believes this imposes a monopoly on the type of trailer hitches and costs out-of-state trucking companies time and money. By acquiring legal assistance, Trucker will consult the legal expertise of an attorney. Reviewing the United States Constitution and past court cases will prove whether or not Trucker has legal grounds to bring a suit against the state of Confusion and overturn the existing statute.

The federal government has not implemented any regulations specifically concerning truck hitches used on U.S. highways, but they have the power to regulate commerce among the states. The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power in the U.S. Constitution that grants the power to regulate interstate commerce with the intent of developing a national market and free trade among states (Cheeseman, 2010). There are some powers that are specifically delegated to the federal government, and the other powers not delegated to federal government are left for the state. State and local governments have the power to enact laws such as building codes, and zoning ordinances (Cheeseman, 2010). Confusion's statute has an impact on interstate commerce even though their requirement for the new hitch is only in their state. The effect on interstate commerce test specifies that if local activity affects interstate commerce, it is subject to regulation by the federal government; therefore, Tanya's lawsuit would fall under federal court jurisdiction.

Whether or not, if the Confusion's statute is constitutional, it is possible that the statute is constitutional, only if Confusion can support their motives for enacting the statute and prove their motives for this statute were strictly to protect the welfare or safety of their residents. Including no intent to restrict interstate commerce or providing the one manufacturer of this hitch with an advantage. Additionally, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 to prohibit abusive monopolies (Legal Information Institute, n.d.). Confusion created a monopoly by requiring all truckers to use a trailer hitch produced only in Confusion. A monopoly occurs when consumers are forced to use an item produced by a single source. Because only one manufacturer produces the type-B trailer hitch in the state, the forced use of the hitch constitutes a monopoly and violates the Sherman Antitrust Act. Congress enacted statutes at the time it enacted the federal Motor Carrier Act of 1980 that "preempted the regulation of trucking by the states" (Cheeseman, 2010 p. 71). Confusion's law also conflicts with federal law in this case. According to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, state and local laws that conflict with valid federal law are unconstitutional.

Confusion's statute directly affects Tanya Trucker and her company. In which the statute enacted by the state of Confusion, causes her trucking company to suffer additional costs. By inflicting an undue burden upon the out-of-state truckers, the statute violates interstate commerce. Two provisions of the United States Constitution that affect the case are the Supremacy Clause and the Commerce Clause. The Supremacy Clause establishes the precedent that federal laws are the supreme laws of the land. Any state statute that conflicts with the Supreme Law is unconstitutional. The commerce clause delegates authority in matters of interstate commerce and regulations to the federal government.

...