Commerce Clause

Internal Affairs and State Sovereignty Principle
Moores v. Friese
No. 05-1590
Supreme Court of the United States

Declining NCLC's request, the Supreme Court rejected review of a California intermediate appellate court's decision to disregard the well-established internal affairs doctrine and instead apply California law to the internal affairs of a Delaware corporation.  In its brief, NCLC argued that the appeal's court decision sets a dangerous precedent in exposing officers and directors of corporations to requirements imposed by the laws of jurisdictions other than where they are incorporated.   

Amicus brief filed 8/14/06.  Certiorari denied 10/2/06.

View brief

Commerce Clause and Taxes on Distribution of Products
McLane Western, Inc. v. Dep't. of Revenue, State of Colorado
No. 05-1294
Supreme Court of the United States

The Supreme Court declined to grant review to consider whether Colorado's imposition of a tax on tobacco products at the first point of distribution within the state violates the Commerce Clause.  Because the tax is levied at the first point of distribution, in-state businesses receive more favorable tax treatment than out-of-state businesses due to the increase in retail price as the product moves higher up the distribution chain.  In its brief, NCLC argued that this structural imbalance runs afoul of the Commerce Clause.

Amicus brief in support of cert. filed 6/12/06.  Cert. denied 10/2/06.

View brief

Extraterritorial Application of State's Antitrust Laws
AT&T v. RLH Industries, Inc., et al.
No. 05-1493
Supreme Court of the United States

The Supreme Court declined to grant review to consider whether a state may constitutionally apply its antitrust laws to conduct which occurred wholly outside its borders merely because the plaintiff is a resident of the state.  In its brief, NCLC argued that the Commerce Clause prohibits a state from regulating such out-of-state conduct. 

Amicus brief in support of cert. filed 6/23/06.  Cert. denied 10/2/06.

View brief

Extraterritorial Application of State Law and the State Sovereignty Principle
Marsh & McLellan Cos., Inc. v. Palmer & Cay, Inc., et. al
No. 05-274
Supreme Court of the United States

Disagreeing with NCLC, the Supreme Court refused to review the Eleventh Circuit’s application of a single state’s law on a nationwide basis.  Urging the Supreme Court to grant review, NCLC argued that the Eleventh Circuit improperly applied a unique aspect of Georgia law to invalidate nationwide a covenant not to compete entered into in a different state.  Georgia, alone among the states, does not enforce covenants not to compete which include clauses which bar “accepting business” during the limitation period.  As NCLC noted in its brief, the Eleventh Circuit’s approach “encourages States to outflank one another in an effort to exert nationwide control over contested questions of public law and policy, thus wreaking havoc upon the ability of parties to define their rights and obligations in contracts involving interstate commerce.”

Amicus brief filed 10/03/2005.  Cert. denied 10/31/05.

 View brief

Commerce Clause Restrictions on Regulation of Out-of-State Conduct
Beretta U.S.A. Corp. et al. v. District of Columbia
No. 05-118
Supreme Court of the United States

NCLC urges the Supreme Court to grant review of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals' decision that the Assault Weapon Manufacturing Strict Liability Act could be applied to out-of-state conduct without running afoul of the Commerce Clause's restrictions on state laws burdening interstate commerce.  NCLC argues that, if the lower court's view of the Commerce Clause to prevail, the resulting patchwork of state laws and contradictory requirements would dangerously impede the constitutional goal of a unified national economy.

Amicus brief filed 8/22/05. Cert. denied 10/05.

View brief