preview

Case Study: Dormant Commerce Clause

Decent Essays

This case determines whether or not the Ordinance 02-02 of Polishtown violates the Dormant Commerce Clause by discriminating against interstate franchise companies, and whether the burden of interstate business outweighs local benefit. After hearing the Petitioner and Defendant briefs I voted to affirm the appellate court’s decision that ordinance in question violates the Dormant Commerce Clause and therefore is rendered invalid. My decision stems from three factors: 1) the ordinance is in direct contradiction of the Dormant Commerce Clause by establishing regulations that aim to directly discriminate interstate franchise corporations. 2) Polishtown does not adequately provide legitimate purpose to justify these discriminatory regulations. …show more content…

The district court reached this decision by applying the balancing test, then acknowledged that the provisions had discriminatory consequences on interstate commerce, the court determined that there was proof of legitimate government purpose to the restrictions and ruled that the local benefits outweighed the burden imposed on interstate commerce. However, Polishtown’s justification of a legitimate local purpose is to preserve the “unique and historical” community characteristics, encouragement of ‘small scale” uses, and the avoidance of increased “traffic congestion… [and] litter, garbage and rubbish offsite.” In response, the court found that “restricting formula stores, while allowing other large [and] non-unique structures, does not preserve a small town character”, as ACME argued that many of the ethnic residents have moved away from the town, that retail businesses have changed, and there is now a higher demand for brand name products versus local shops. In addition, Polishtown could not explain to the circuit court why the ordinance singles out retail stores and restaurants with standardized features”, as the ACME store was originally zoned for commercial use as a retail pharmacy and yet greatly exceeds the amount square footage the ordinance allows for by 10,000 square feet. Further, the stated purpose of reducing traffic and garbage are undermined by the parties’ stipulations that Polishtown has existing “land development regulations, other than the Ordinance, that govern and control traffic generation of retail uses,” and “that limit the dimensions, locations, and uses of buildings and signs.” In conclusion, Polishtown’s legitimate local purpose of preserving a “unique and historical” community fails to hold up in justifying the discriminatory effects brought on by their

Get Access