Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt

Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt
Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt
	Supreme Court of the United States
Argued April 21, 1992; Decided June 1, 1992
Full case name	Chemical Waste Management, Inc., petitioner v. Guy Hunt, Governor of Alabama et al., respondents
Citations	504 U.S. 334 (more) 112 S. Ct. 2009; 119 L. Ed. 2d 121; 60 U.S.L.W. 4433; 34 ERC 1721; 22 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,909
Case history
Prior	Hunt v. Chemical Waste Mgmt., Inc. 584 So.2d 1367 (Ala. 1991)
Holding
	No state may attempt to isolate itself from a problem common to the several States by raising barriers to the free flow of interstate trade; a fee on the importation of out-of-state waste constitutes a barrier to interstate trade. Supreme Court of Alabama reversed and case remanded with instructions.
Court membership
	Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices Byron White · Harry Blackmun; John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor; Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy; David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Case opinions
Majority	White, joined by Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas
Dissent	Rehnquist
Laws applied
	U.S. Const. Art. I § 8

Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt, 504 U.S. 334 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case that held that an Alabama law imposing a fee (of $72 per ton) on out-of-state hazardous waste being disposed of in-state violated the Dormant Commerce Clause.

Opinion of the Court

The state law was found to discriminate against out-of-state commerce. Justice White explained that "No state may attempt to isolate itself from a problem common to the several States by raising barriers to the free flow of interstate trade," relying on Philadelphia v. New Jersey (1978) as precedent.

The Court suggested two less-discriminatory alternatives to the fee on out-of-state hazardous waste:

A generally-applicable, additional fee per ton of all hazardous waste disposed of within Alabama, regardless of its source.
A per-mile tax on all vehicles transporting hazardous waste across Alabama roads.

Dissent

Chief Justice Rehnquist dissented arguing that States may wish to avoid the risks to public health and environment by regulating the disposal of hazardous waste. He continued to say that since taxes are a recognized and effective means for discouraging the consumption of scarce commodities, which he in this case had deemed the environment. Then there was nothing unconstitutional or discriminatory about the state of Alabama's taxes.

Related cases

White v. Massachusetts Council of Constr. Employers, Inc., 460 U.S. 204, 206 -208 (1983)[1]
Reeves, Inc. v. Stake, 447 U.S. 429, 436-437 (1980)[2]
Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp., 426 U.S. 794, 810 (1976)[3]

References

White v. Massachusetts Council of Constr. Employers, Inc., 460 U.S. 204, 206 (1983).
Reeves, Inc. v. Stake, 447 U.S. 429, 436 (1980).
Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp., 426 U.S. 794, 810 (1976).

External links

Text of Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt, 504 U.S. 334 (1992) is available from: Findlaw Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.

[1] White v. Massachusetts Council of Constr. Employers, Inc., 460 U.S. 204, 206 (1983).

[2] Reeves, Inc. v. Stake, 447 U.S. 429, 436 (1980).

[3] Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp., 426 U.S. 794, 810 (1976).