Which of the following was the result in the case in the text "Black Star Farms LLC v. Jerry Olive, Arizona Department of Liquor License and Control", the case in which it was alleged that an Arizona law limiting direct sales of wine by producers was unconstitutional on the basis that it discriminated against out-of-state wineries?

A. That the law discriminated against out-of-state wineries in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause.

B. That the law discriminated against out-of-state wineries in violation of the regular Commerce Clause, not the dormant Commerce Clause.

C. That the law discriminated against out-of-state wineries in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause but that it was a valid exercise of the state's police power.

D. That the law discriminated against out-of-state wineries in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

E. That the law was valid and did not discriminate against out-of-state wineries.

Question

Social Studies

Kamryn Avery

22 January, 18:58

Which of the following was the result in the case in the text "Black Star Farms LLC v. Jerry Olive, Arizona Department of Liquor License and Control", the case in which it was alleged that an Arizona law limiting direct sales of wine by producers was unconstitutional on the basis that it discriminated against out-of-state wineries?

A. That the law discriminated against out-of-state wineries in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause.

B. That the law discriminated against out-of-state wineries in violation of the regular Commerce Clause, not the dormant Commerce Clause.

C. That the law discriminated against out-of-state wineries in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause but that it was a valid exercise of the state's police power.

D. That the law discriminated against out-of-state wineries in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

E. That the law was valid and did not discriminate against out-of-state wineries.

+5

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Anna Mcneil · Answer 1

the answer is: E. That the law was valid and did not discriminate against out-of-state wineries.

the state government could impose a regulation to limit or prohibit the sales of a certain type of product if that product impose some sort of harmful effect to the consumers. (Alcohols are included in this type of product)

The state cannot be considered to be discriminating out of state wineries because the state government does not have the jurisdiction to regulate businesses that were established outside its own state.