Pork, the Dormant Commerce Clause, and Legislating Morality

We the People

National Constitution Center

News, News Commentary, History

4.6 • 1.1K Ratings

🗓️ 21 October 2022

⏱️ 44 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in National Pork Producers v. Ross. The case is about a 2018 California ballot initiative, in which voters decided that the state should prohibit the in-state sale of pork from animals confined in a manner inconsistent with California standards. Opponents of the amendment argue that it violates dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence. Today on We the People, Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of Berkeley Law, and Michael McConnell of Stanford Law join host Jeffrey Rosen discuss whether the Interstate Commerce Clause restricts states from regulating in-state conduct that has a substantial impact on mostly out-of-state producers. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Hello, I'm Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center,
0:09.4	and welcome to We The People, a weekly show of constitutional debate.
0:13.2	The National Constitution Center is a nonpartisan non-profit chartered by Congress to increase
0:18.4	awareness and understanding of the Constitution among the American people. Last week the Supreme Court heard oral arguments. the California ballot initiative in which voters decided that the state should
0:33.8	ban the sale of pork from animals confined in what they considered to be an
0:38.1	inhumane manner. Today on We The People we will discuss whether the dormant commerce clause of the Constitution
0:44.7	restricts states from using moral objections as the basis for economic
0:48.8	regulations.
0:50.0	Joining me to discuss this fascinating and important case are two of America's leading experts on constitutional law.
0:56.0	It is always such an honor to convene them and I'm so excited to share the conversation with you, dear We The People listeners.
1:01.0	Erwin Chemerinsky is Dean of Berkeley Law.
1:04.0	He's the author of 14 books, including most recently
1:07.2	presumed guilty how the Supreme Court empowered the police
1:10.0	and subverted civil rights.
1:12.2	And he filed an amicus brief on the side of California.
1:15.6	Erwin, it is an honor to welcome you to We The People.
1:18.4	It's always such a pleasure to be with you and Michael.
1:20.8	And Michael McConnell is Richard and Francis Mallory Professor of Law at
1:24.2	Stanford and Director of the Constitutional Law Center. He is co-author of agreeing
1:29.8	to disagree how the Establishment Clause protects religious diversity and freedom of conscience
1:34.7	which came out earlier this year.
1:36.5	He filed an amicus brief with the Chamber of Commerce of the United States in support
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from National Constitution Center, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of National Constitution Center and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.