State of Confusion Paper
This paper will be reviewing the case brought upon the state of Confusion by Tanya
Trucker, who owns a trucking company in the state of Denial. The state of Confusion has
enacted a statute requiring all trucks and towing trailers who use its highways to use a
B-type truck hitch. The problem is that Tanya Trucker would have to purchase these
hitches to go through this one state or go around the state of Confusion.
What Court will have Jurisdiction of Tanyas Suit?
Tanya Trucker resides in the state of Denial and she is placing suit against the state of
Confusion. Therefore, the federal court will have jurisdiction over this case. Cheeseman
(2010) states, A case may be brought in federal court if there is diversity of citizenship (p
12). Tanya Trucker could file suit in the federal court for violating the commerce clause of
the constitution. The commerce clause grants the federal government the authority to
regulate interstate commerce (Cheeseman, 2010, p. 73). The interstate commerce has the
ability to pass laws that regulate the behaviors of business.
Is the Confusion Statue constitutional?
The Confusion statue is not constitutional. The interstate commerce clause shows this in
Article I, Section 9. Cheeseman, 2010 states, No preference shall be given by any
regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another; nor shall
vessels bound to, or from, on state, be obligated to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another (p
87). This clearly shows that the state of Confusion cannot charge dues, the special hitch, to
