American Constitutionalism in Historical Perspective (packet)

Not formally discriminatory: no distinction b/w residents & non-residents. Negative CC analysis only takes place when there is no formal discrim, otherwise would be invalid under Art. IV, sec. 2 (P & I).

No undue burden: does the state’s reg require a business to restructure its business in drastic ways?

Legitimate Police Power Purposes: i.e. health and safety, environmental.

Reasonable relationship between the means and ends of the regulation. Court is second guessing policy decisions of states, economic due process

Cases:

1. 
   SC v. Barnwell: law prohibiting trucks over a certain weight from using hwy. Upheld b/c not discriminatory (bears equally on in-state and out-of-state business), safety is acceptable purpose, rational relationship of means to ends. Deferential treatment b/c economic legislation.
   
2. 
   South Pacific v. AZ: limiting length of trains that can go through state. Trains are “great engine of national unity.” Strikes this down because harsh impact on out of state trains, undue burden for trains to have to split up before entering AZ, would result in AZ setting standards for nation.
   
   1. 
      Impacts those that are not rep w/in the state, so not able to contest legislation. No adequate justification for requiring a train company to restructure its business. Safety justification fails b/c short trains are more dangerous than longer trains and no evidence of net saving lives from switching to shorter trains.
      
   2. 
      D/n interact w/ eco decisions of state generally but do w/ commerce clause issues. Exacts a higher level of scrutiny when economic interests is hurting interstate commerce.
      
3. 
   Bib: IL and AK req diff types of mud guards on trucks on its roads. Violates anti-discrim concept by impacting on unrep ppl outside Illinois. Strikes down b/c though not formally discriminatory, an undue burden b/c have to reconstruct business and no legit state purpose. (Douglas).
   
4. 
   Kassell: Iowa regulating length of trucks in state. Strikes down although no formal discrim, Iowa business are exempted from this reg. Creates an undue burden b/c out-of-staters would be req to restructure their businesses. Lives will be lost so presumptively unreasonable (need to show that law is saving human lives in order to justify burden and disproportionate impact on out of state trucks) Questionable state purpose since roads are wider than in other states (easy to pass). This is economic policy making, looking closer because of national impact of regulation.
   
   1.