Litigants: | Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt |
Arguedate: | April 21 |
Argueyear: | 1992 |
Decidedate: | June 1 |
Decideyear: | 1992 |
Fullname: | Chemical Waste Management, Inc., petitioner v. Guy Hunt, Governor of Alabama et al., respondents |
Usvol: | 504 |
Uspage: | 334 |
Parallelcitations: | 112 S. Ct. 2009; 119 L. Ed. 2d 121; 60 U.S.L.W. 4433; 34 ERC 1721; 22 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,909 |
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. |
Majority: | White |
Joinmajority: | Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas |
Dissent: | Rehnquist |
Lawsapplied: | 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.
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:
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.