Commerce Clause Challenge To Maine Town's Waste Management Scheme
September 1, 1999
On April 26, in a case of first impression in the First Circuit, the Court of
Appeals in Houlton Citizens' Coalition v. Town of Houlton, rejected a Commerce
Clause challenge to the Maine town of Houlton's waste management plan. The town
by contract designated a single firm as the exclusive hauler of residential
waste within its borders and enacted a flow-control ordinance directing all such
waste either to be collected by that firm or to be brought to its transfer
station. The town's plan was challenged as violative of the Commerce Clause, the
Takings Clause and the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution, as
well as the town charter. The Federal District Court of Maine rejected these
arguments, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
In affirming, the appellate court focused upon the Commerce Clause challenge
and the application of the so-called "dormant" Commerce Clause. The
dormant Commerce Clause prevents state and local authorities from regulating
areas in which Congress has the constitutional power to legislate "to
regulate commerce," but has not affirmatively acted. As a result, if a
state or locality enacts a law or other ordinance that unduly favors in-state
commercial interests over their out-of-state counterparts, such law or ordinance
will be struck down unless the "discrimination" can be shown to be
unrelated to economic protectionism.
The court noted that similar ordinances had been struck down elsewhere as in
violation of the dormant Commerce Clause. However, the Houlton ordinance was
different than those found to be impermissible, because the Houlton ordinance
gave all comers equal access to the local market. Because both in-state and
out-of-state bidders are allowed to compete freely on a level playing field,
there is no constitutional violation. The court noted that the town awarded the
trash-hauling contract to the lowest bidder and did not restrict access to the
bidding process to any particular class of bidders. In conclusion, the court
held that the town ordinance's almost "invisible" burden on interstate
commerce was outweighed by the strong local interest in efficient waste
management.
Related Practices