Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's the rub, I think broccoli is safe from government, probably most of the broccoli sold and consumed crosses state lines. Most produce is raised in concentrated regions, e.g. most domestic oranges are grown in only two states.
That wouldn't prevent a state from banning the sale of broccoli, if that were the case then any product that is produced in a state in the US would be prevented from being regulated or banned by another state.
I think the test is whether the state regulation causes impacts on 3rd party states from obtaining that product, so for instance if Oklahoma banned broccoli, if it was the producer there is no issue, if they are banning consumption in the state of Oklahoma there is no problem, if they are also banning the transport of broccoli through the state of Oklahoma to other states, then there is a problem.
Consider that if it was that trade for the production state was impacted, then California's prohibitions and restrictions on firearms would be an interstate commerce issue, Tennesee for instance could sue for California's prohibition on sales of 50BMG rifles including those manufactured by Barrett under interstate commerce violations, same with any state with any arms company affected by any regulation or restriction. This has not happened, and I don't think that those states have grounds under interstate commerce. Same issue applies for beer, some states have dry counties, so couldn't that leave a state open to prosecution for affecting the interstate commerce of beer, since it's produced in relatively few areas, or hard liquor like say Bourbon, Kentucky could have a field day with that.
.I know this is a silly premise, but let's say that Oklahoma decided to ban the sale of broccoli within the state because it's healthy hippie food from California or something like that. Could they do that?
Yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharks With Lasers
At what point would it interfere with interstate commerce?
It would interfere with Interstate Commerce, if the State attempted to block the transportation of broccoli through the State.
Note that California bans a lot of products, or has special rules for products sold in California, however those products are delivered to and through California ports and shipped by rail or truck to other States.
I know this is a silly premise, but let's say that Oklahoma decided to ban the sale of broccoli within the state because it's healthy hippie food from California or something like that. Could they do that? I know it would be enforceable in restaurants, but what about the general public? At what point would it interfere with interstate commerce?
A state can ban anything it wishes, as long as it does not encroach on the US or State Constitution, but that has not stopped them from trying.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
