← All Authorities
United States constitutional

National Pork Producers Council v Ross

598 US 356 (2023)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year2023
StatusBinding authority

Summary

California's Prop 12 restricting pork sales from confined pigs does not violate the dormant Commerce Clause; Pike balancing inapplicable where law regulates in-state sales non-discriminatorily.

Key Principle

California's Proposition 12 (restricting pork sales from confined pigs) does not violate the dormant Commerce Clause; the Pike balancing test does not apply where the state law is not discriminatory and regulates in-state sales.

Area of Law

constitutional

Related Cases

NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (2023) 97 ALJR 1005

Indefinite administrative detention of a non-citizen with no real prospect of removal is unlawful as punitive and contrary to Ch III of the Australian Constitution, overruling Al-Kateb v Godwin.

Farm Transparency International v NSW (2022) 276 CLR 81

HCA upheld NSW ag-gag laws as valid notwithstanding a burden on the implied freedom of political communication, applying the structured proportionality test.

Palmer v Western Australia (2021) 272 CLR 505

HCA upheld WA COVID-19 border closure legislation as valid under s.92, finding restrictions on interstate movement were reasonably necessary and proportionate to protect public health.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of National Pork Producers Council v Ross and how it applies to your situation.

Explain National Pork Producers Counci...