To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Oregon Waste Systems, Inc. v. Department of Environmental Quality of Oregon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oregon Waste Systems, Inc. v. Department of Environmental Quality of Oregon
Argued January 18, 1994
Decided April 4, 1994
Full case nameOregon Waste Systems, Inc., et al. v. Department of Environmental Quality of Oregon, et al.
Citations511 U.S. 93 (more)
114 S. Ct. 1345; 128 L. Ed. 2d 13
Case history
Prior316 Ore. 99 (reversed and remanded).
Holding
Oregon's surcharge was invalid under the dormant commerce clause
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
Harry Blackmun · John P. Stevens
Sandra Day O'Connor · Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy · David Souter
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Case opinions
MajorityThomas, joined by Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg
DissentRehnquist, joined by Blackmun
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art. I § 8 cl. 3 (Commerce Clause), Dormant Commerce Clause

Oregon Waste Systems, Inc. v. Department of Environmental Quality of Oregon, 511 U.S. 93 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court decision focused on the aspect of state power and the interpretation of the Commerce Clause as a limitation on states' regulatory power. In this particular case, the Supreme Court considered whether the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's alleged cost-based surcharge on the disposal of out-of-state waste violated the dormant commerce clause.[1]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    12 931
    47 423
    5 366
  • Produce and Agriculture Threats: America's Heartland - Episode 901
  • Top Tips to Minimize Fruit & Vegetable Spoilage: Produce Management 101
  • Power to the People - Full Video

Transcription

Opinion of the Court

The Court voted 7–2 in favor of Oregon Waste Systems, holding that Oregon's surcharge was invalid under the negative commerce clause. This meant that the surcharge favored in-state economic interests over out-of-state counterparts. The surcharge was discriminatory to outside states because it imposed a fee three times greater than that imposed on in-state waste.[2]

In order for such a surcharge to be valid, it would have to be justified as compensatory, in that it makes out-of-state shippers pay their fair share of the disposal costs. This would have to be equivalent to a measurable standard that would be the same for in-state shipping. However, Oregon's surcharge of $2.25 for out-of-state waste compared with a surcharge of $0.85 on in-state waste was determined facially discriminatory. Citing a previous case, the Supreme Court indicated that such surcharges may be acceptable if they were based on increased costs specifically associated with out-of-state waste.

See also

References

  1. ^ Stephens, Otis. American Constitutional Law Volume 1. Thomson Wadsworth. USA, 2003
  2. ^ Supreme Court Collection. Cornell University Law School. Legal Information Institute

External links

This page was last edited on 13 September 2023, at 02:51
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.