Market Participant and How It Loses Its Right to Discriminate out of State Business - Essay Example

Unless a state provokes a congressional action on discrimination and imposition of restrictions on commerce and ultimate prohibition of goods and services from other states, it is under a constitutional obligation to allow out-of-state commerce (Blond 2009).

Being a market participant has a massive impact on the right of a state to discriminate against out-of-state businesses. In the interest of national political stability, a state cannot impose restrictions on goods and services from other states with the state being a proprietor of the same goods and services. This is in earnest of safeguarding against retaliatory measures to the state from other states which could adversely impact national interests and relations. Essentially the doctrine of market participation stipulates that a state participating as a producer or seller of a good or service cannot regulate the same products from another state. Contrary to this, the state will be in violation of the cardinal requirement of commerce indiscrimination (Blond 2009).

Furthermore, the fact that a state is a market participant deprives it of the right to regulate the economic advantage of interstate commerce. The imposition of a regulatory measure would imply a disparity in the treatment of other producers which categorically excludes them from commerce. Moreover, market discrimination is a barrier to the national economic market envisioned in the Dormant Commerce Clause of the constitution. In effect, any alleged discriminative policy enacted by a state should be placed under strict constitutional scrutiny to establish its compelling state purpose. In the advent the policies are not justified to be unrestrictive they should be deemed per se invalid (Blond 2009).

Justification of Market Discrimination

Market discrimination cannot be justified. Irrevocably it is an illegal action that is against the laws of the land. According to the constitutional commerce clause, a market participant is prohibited from imposing any economic protectionism which is designed as a regulatory measure benefiting interstate interests while burdening the out-of-state competitors. In addition, the commerce clause confers upon only congress the right to formulate policies and regulations geared towards favoring the citizens. In view of this, the constitutional commerce clause Article 1, 8, Clause 3 does not call for any state to independently justify its entry into the market (Blond 2009). Read More