Political Rivalries Among the States, Incommensurability, and the Dormant Commerce Clause

62 Pages Posted: 27 Jul 2023

See all articles by R. George Wright

R. George Wright

Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

Date Written: July 24, 2023

Abstract

Whether they explicitly recognize it or not, the courts are often confronted with problems of basic value incommensurability. Courts should recognize that whatever the nature of the incommensurability in any given case, some case rationales and outcomes will almost invariably be more reasonable, less arbitrary, and more jurisprudentially defensible than others. There are some cases of incommensurability in which the court should stay its hand. But there are certainly other cases in which the courts should be more assertive. Prime examples of the latter involve dormant commerce clause cases in which states adopt non-discriminatory rules intended to coerce producers in other states to adopt political, moral, and cultural policies favored by the regulating state. If courts do not work their way past the incommensurabilities in such cases, there is a likelihood of, ultimately, broadly unattractive practical consequences.

Keywords: dormant commerce clause, incommensurability, federalism, polarization

JEL Classification: K10, K20, K30

Suggested Citation

Wright, R. George, Political Rivalries Among the States, Incommensurability, and the Dormant Commerce Clause (July 24, 2023). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4520060 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4520060

R. George Wright (Contact Author)

Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law ( email )

530 West New York Street
Indianapolis, IN 46202
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
66
Abstract Views
229
Rank
693,541
PlumX Metrics