The U.S. Constitution provides several sources of authority for federal and state governments to regulate business. One of the most comprehensive governmental powers provided for in the U.S. Constitution arises under the so-called Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 8. Historically, the Commerce Clause has been interpreted broadly by the courts, so that virtually any activity can be described as affecting interstate commerce, either positively or negatively, either directly or indirectly. Consequently, the federal government has the authority, under the commerce clause, to regulate interstate commerce, as well as intrastate commerce that affects interstate commerce. However, States also have power to regulate business within their borders due to their inherit police powers.
Case Scenario: Most trucking firms, including BJ Hauling Corporation, use 65-foot-long trailer trucks to ship commodities on the highway system of the United States. Almost all states permit these vehciles on thier highways, and the Federal Government does not regulate the length of trucks that can use the Nation's highways. However, the State of Maningford (yes I am making up names here), enacted a statute that restricted the length of trucks that could use highways in the State to 50 feet. This meant that if BJ Hauling wanted to move goods through Maningford, it need to either use smaller trucks or detach the double trailers and shuttle them through the State spearately. Its only other alternative was to divert its 65-foot double around Maningford. BJ Hauling filed suit against Maningford, alleging that the State statute was unconstitutional.
Who should win and why?