Jump to content

Maine v. Taylor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 206.193.226.178 (talk) at 18:45, 31 May 2016. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Maine v. Taylor
Argued March 24, 1986
Decided June 23, 1986
Full case nameMaine v. Taylor et al.
Citations477 U.S. 131 (more)
106 S. Ct. 2440; 91 L. Ed. 2d 110; 1986 U.S. LEXIS 111
Case history
PriorIn City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey, the court ruled that New Jersey's ban of out-of-state solid waste was facially discriminatory to the state's residents in a national market and was therefore overturned.
Holding
States may prohibit the importation of out-of-state goods moving within the flow of commerce only if the prohibition serves a legitimate local concern and there are no other means of protecting that interest.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr. · William Rehnquist
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Case opinions
MajorityBlackmun, joined by Burger, Brennan, White, Marshall, Powell, Rehnquist, O'Connor
DissentStevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art. I, § 8

Maine v. Taylor, 477 U.S. 131 (1986),[1] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that there was an exception to the "virtually per se rule of invalidity" of the dormant commerce clause. The Supreme Court of the United States found that a Maine law prohibiting the importation of out-of-state bait fish was constitutional because Maine authorities couldn't be certain that imported fish would be free of "parasites and nonnative species" that might pose environmental harm to local ecology. Discriminatory laws may be upheld only if they serve "legitimate local purposes that could not adequately be served by available nondiscriminatory alternatives," wrote Justice Blackmun, author of the majority opinion.

See also

  • ^ 477 U.S. 131 Full text of the opinion courtesy of Findlaw.com.
  • Summary of case from OYEZ