The state of South Dakota operated a cement plant. Reeves argued the policy unconstitutionally discriminated against interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause. When a cement shortage hit South Dakota, the legislature ordered that the cement plant must first supply all of South Dakota’s customers before honoring out of state … If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. Pp. In 1978, for economic reasons, the South Dakota plant began supplying in-state customers before honoring other … REEVES, INC. V. STAKE 447 U.S. 429 (1980) CASE BRIEF REEVES, INC. V. STAKE. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. 14,000 + case briefs, hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick' Black Letter Law. The State’s preference for its residents is not protectionism in action. Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 2) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 1) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake William J. Janklow: Yes, sir. The market participant exception allows states to avoid the Commerce Clause but it may not prevent a state from being subject to the Privileges and Immunities Clause. Every Bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below: PLUS: Hundreds of law school topic-related videos from The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series™: Monthly Subscription ($19 / Month) Annual Subscription ($175 / Year). The State is not hoarding natural resources like coal, timber, wild game, or minerals. To reverse would be to discourage similar state projects. When a state acts as a market participant, and not as a market regulator, it is not prohibited from buying only from or selling only to local businesses. Discussion. Id. A link to your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email 2155, 60 L.Ed.2d 1041 (1979). Email Address: You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, If you have not signed up for your Casebriefs Cloud account Click Here, Thank you for registering as a Pre-Law Student with Casebriefs™. Reeves, Inc. v. William Stake. When a cement shortage hit South Dakota, the legislature ordered that the cement plant must first supply all of South Dakota’s customers before honoring out of state contracts or commitments. Held. Issue. There are -- Reeves, as in they're arguing today, we've got … In a case like the instant one, the only inquiry is whether the challenged program constituted direct state or local participation in the market. This decision approves protectionist state policies. ... Reeves, Inc v. William Stake447 U.S. 429, 100 S. Ct. 2271, 65 L. Ed. You also agree to abide by our. The state of South Dakota operated a cement plant. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. South Dakota built a state-owned cement plant, which for many years sold to private buyers, but later gave preferences to in-state buyers. When the United States appeared to protest in the state proceeding, it did not assert any federal water rights claims, nor did it seek to adjudicate any claims until the hydrological studies as to the effects of the Cappaerts' pumping There is no indication of a constitutional plan to limit the ability of the state itself to operate freely in the market. Brief Fact Summary. Held. South Dakota is not limiting a natural resource. at 447 U. S. 436. Argued April 16, 1980. 14,000 + case briefs, hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick' Black Letter Law. Wyoming could have provided or attracted alternative sources of supply for its suppliers. Reeves, Inc. v. Kelley, 441 U.S. 939, 99 S.Ct. An exception covers States that go beyond regulation and themselves “participat[e] in the market” to “exercis[e] the right to favor [their] own citizens over others,” Hughes v. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. 447 U.S. 429 (1980) ... CASE FACTS The nation constructed a cement institute inwards reply to a regional cement shortage. REEVES, INC. v. STAKE ET AL. In 1980, Janklow argued Reeves, Inc. v. Stake before the U.S. Supreme Court. No. South Dakota is a market participant because it built the plant and sold the cement using the State’s money. While these services are protectionist in a loose sense, they also reflect the purpose of the state government (to serve the citizens of the State). The people of South Dakota are using the power of the State to furnish themselves with cement forbidden to the people of neighboring States. Facts of the case. *430 Dennis M. Kirven argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner. ... Reeves, Inc v. William Stake447 U.S. 429, 100 S. Ct. 2271, 65 L. Ed. Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 2) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 1) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake Warren E. Burger: Does this plant pay taxes to the State of South Dakota for its operations? address. South Dakota built a state-owned cement plant, which for many years sold to private buyers, but later gave preferences to in-state buyers. 2d 244, 1980 U.S. South-Central Timber Development, Inc v. Massachusetts Council of Constr. Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 2) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 1) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake Warren E. Burger: Does this plant pay taxes to the State of South Dakota for its operations? Reeves, Inc. v. Kelley, 8 Cir., 603 F.2d 736 (1979). 79-677 Argued: April 16, 1980 Decided: June 19, 1980. LOCATION:Rincon Island. William J. Janklow argued the cause for respondents. The Commerce Clause was concerned with state laws inhibiting interstate trade such as home embargoes, customs duties, and regulated imports. Please check your email and confirm your registration. dirasaniraurus. Reeves is a ready mix concrete distributor from Wyoming that relied on a cement factory in South Dakota for 95% of its cement. Reeves, Inc. v. Stake, 447 U. S. 429, 442 (1980). 447 U.S. 429 (1980) NATURE OF THE CASE: An appeal to determine if a state regulation burdens interstate commerce when the state is a market participant and advantages its own citizens. The case had been initiated while he was attorney general, and Janklow argued it because he was the attorney in South Dakota's government who was most familiar with the details. Email Address: You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, If you have not signed up for your Casebriefs Cloud account Click Here, Thank you for registering as a Pre-Law Student with Casebriefs™. Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following, The Jurisdiction Of Federal Courts In Constitutional Cases, The Bill Of Rights, The Civil War Amendments, And Their Inter-Relationship, The Due Process, Contract, And Just Compensation Clauses And The Review Of The Reasonableness Of Legislation, The Equal Protection Clause And The Review Of The Reasonableness Of Legislation, Defining The Scope Of 'Liberty' And 'Property' Protected By The Due Process Clause-The Procedural Due Process Cases, Application Of The Post Civil War Amendments To Private Conduct: Congressional Power To Enforce The Amendments, Governmental Control Of The Content Of Expression, Restrictions On Time, Place, Or Matter Of Expression, Protection Of Penumbral First Amendment Rights, LSAT Logic Games (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning I (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning II (June 2007 Practice Exam), You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, Kassel v. Consolidated Freightways Corporation, White v. Massachusetts Council for Construction Employers, Inc, United Building and Construction Trades Council of Camden County and Vicinity v. Mayor and Council of the City of Camden, Gade v. National Solid Waste Management Association, 22 Ill.447 U.S. 429, 100 S. Ct. 2271, 65 L. Ed. at 483 U. S. 103 (quoting Square D Co. v. Niagara Frontier Tariff Bureau, Inc., 476 U. S. 409, 476 U. S. 424 (1986)). “Such policies, while perhaps ‘protectionist’ in a loose sense, reflect the essential and patently unobjectionable purpose of state government—to serve the citizens of the State.” Ibid. For Your Data Reeves, Inc. V. William Stake Illustration Brief By . Department of Revenue of Ky. v. Employers, Inc., 460 U. S. 204, 206-208 (1983); Reeves, Inc. v. Stake, 447 U. S. 429, 436-437 (1980); Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp., 426 U. S. 794, 810 (1976). Employers, Inc., 460 U.S. 204, 206 -208 (1983); Reeves, Inc. v. Stake, 447 U.S. 429, 436 -437 (1980); Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp., 426 U.S. 794, 810 (1976). Reeves, Inc v. Stake. Synopsis of Rule of Law. There is no limit to a State’s ability to operate freely in the free market. The consequences of South Dakota's "residents-first" policy were devastating to petitioner Reeves, Inc., a Wyoming firm. Brief Fact Summary. 447 U.S. 429, 100 S. Ct. 2271, 65 L. Ed. dirasaniraurus. 2d 244, 1980 U.S. Past errors may in rare cases be "sufficiently blatant" to overcome the "strong presumption of continued validity that adheres in the judicial interpretation of a statute,'" but this is not such a case. Dennis M. Kirven: It pays the profit over and I think --Warren E. Burger: A substantial percentage of the plant's production was sold to buyers outside the state. Justice Powell, Brennan, White, and Stevens dissenting: The Commerce Clause was intended to prevent a policy where a State may prefer its own citizens to out-of-state customers in times of shortage. Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals is affirmed. Ante, at 432-433. Justice Lewis Powell (J. Powell) dissents because he thinks this is exactly the type of economic protectionism that the Constitution’s Commerce Clause was intended to prevent. 2d 244, 1980 U.S. South-Central Timber Development, Inc v. A state as a market participant may hoard its resources from the national market. A state program that was funded through taxes paid by the citizens built the cement plant. When the State imposed its preference for South Dakota residents in 1978, Reeves had to reduce its production by over 75%. Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 2) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 1) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake Harry A. Blackmun: Let me ask you one other question. Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp., 426 U.S. 794 ; Reeves, Inc. v. Stake, 447 U.S. 429 . Reeves is a ready mix concrete distributor from Wyoming that relied on a cement factory in South Dakota for 95% of its cement. The Plaintiffs, Toomer and other out-of-state commercial fisherman (Plaintiff), challenged a South Carolina Law that imposed higher license fees to out-of-state boats based than in … 2d 244, 1980 U.S. South-Central Timber Development, Inc v. Thank you and the best of luck to you on your LSAT exam. Brief Fact Summary. Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 2) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - April 16, 1980 (Part 1) in Reeves Inc. v. Stake William J. Janklow: There were times when it did provide it at a loss. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. You also agree to abide by our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy, and you may cancel at any time. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited use trial. Reeves, Inc. v. William Stake case brief summary 447 U.S. 429 (1980) CASE SYNOPSIS. The issue presented in this case concerns the application of the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution of a state policy favoring its own citizens over citizens of other States in a sale of products owned and manufactured by that State. For Your Data Reeves, Inc. V. William Stake Illustration Brief By . Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter. The State was created to serve the needs of South Dakota citizens during a shortage in 1919. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. Synopsis of Rule of Law. May a State give preference to in-state buyers? : 79-677. 99-536 Reeves versus Sanderson Plumbing Products Inc. will be announced by Justice O’Connor. In 1978, for economic reasons, the South Dakota plant began supplying in-state customers before honoring other … Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following, The Structure Of The Constitution's Protection Of Civil Rights And Civil Liberties, Fundamental Fights Under Due Process And Equal Protection, LSAT Logic Games (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning I (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning II (June 2007 Practice Exam), You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, Cipollone, Executor of the Estate of Rose D. Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc, Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc v. Paul, Director, Department of Agriculture of California, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission, Hines, Secretary of Labor ad Industry of Pennsylvania v. Davidowitz, H.P. In a case like the instant one, the only inquiry is whether the challenged program constituted direct state or local participation in the market. Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement – June 12, 2000 in Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. William H. Rehnquist: The opinion of the Court in No. PETITIONER:Reeves Inc. RESPONDENT:Stake. The suppliers could have guarded against shortages by executing long-term supply contracts with the South Dakota plant. Accessed 18 Oct. 2020. The Constitution’s Commerce Clause is applicable to State taxes and other regulatory measures that impede interstate commerce. One such customer was Reeves, Inc., a concrete distributor in Wyoming that obtained over 90 percent of its cement from the state-run plant. For 20 years, Reeves had purchased about 95% of its cement from the South Dakota plant. When a state becomes a “market participant”, as is the case here because they are selling cement, their commercial activities are not bound by the Commerce Constitution’s Clause and may favor in-state interests. The State did not limit access to the raw materials used to make cement, nor did it restrict the ability of private firms or other States to set up plants within its borders. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited use trial. 447 U.S. 429 (1980) ... CASE FACTS The nation constructed a cement institute inwards reply to a regional cement shortage. As a pre-law student you are automatically registered for the Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course. A substantial percentage of the plant's production was sold to buyers outside the state. NO. "Cappaert v. United States." Thank you and the best of luck to you on your LSAT exam. CITATION: 447 US 429 (1980) ARGUED: Apr 16, 1980. You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter. A market participant may freely exercise his own independent discretion as to parties with whom he will deal. 2d 244 (1980). CASE BRIEF WORKSHEET Title of Case: Reeves, Inc. v. William Stake, US SC 1980 Facts: SD built a cement plant to deal with cement shortages in the state.The SD Cement Commission concluded all of the cement produced would be needed inside the state. Unlock your Study Buddy for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited trial. Every Bundle includes the complete text from each of the titles below: PLUS: Hundreds of law school topic-related videos from The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series™: Monthly Subscription ($19 / Month) Annual Subscription ($175 / Year). videos, thousands of real exam questions, and much more. address. March 31, 2020 Edit. ... Reeves, Inc v. William Stake447 U.S. 429, 100 S. Ct. 2271, 65 L. Ed. Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 205300001- SupremeCtBriefs @usdoj.gov (202) 514-2217 206-208. Whatever burdens South Dakota is placing on interstate commerce in acting as a market participant is offset by countervailing considerations of policy and fairness. Reeves cannot argue that the State is granting in-state ready mix concrete suppliers a competitive advantage over the out of state suppliers. Reeves, Inc. v. Stake, 447 U.S. 429 (1980), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that individual states, when acting as producers or suppliers rather than as market regulators, may discriminate preferentially against out-of-state residents. DECIDED BY: Burger Court (1975-1981) LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Synopsis of Rule of Law. videos, thousands of real exam questions, and much more. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. For the 14 reeves inc v william stake case brief, no risk, unlimited use trial subscription within the state of South has...: Burger Court ( 1975-1981 ) LOWER Court: United States Court of Appeals that! A Wyoming firm state ’ s money Clause was concerned with state laws inhibiting interstate trade such home... Ready mix concrete distributor from Wyoming that relied on a cement institute inwards reply to regional! Videos, thousands of real exam questions, and you may cancel at any time that case.4 Again on! Its previous holding violation of the United States Court of Appeals distinguished that case.4 Again relying on Scrap... 'S production was sold to private buyers, but later gave preferences in-state... Constitutional plan to limit the ability of the plant stopped filling its orders to reverse would be to similar!, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription, v.... Should not be able to withhold its cement from interstate commerce County and Vicinity v. Mayor and of... The commerce Clause is applicable to state taxes and other regulatory measures that impede interstate in... Mix concrete distributor from Wyoming that relied on a cement institute inwards to! Suppliers could have provided or attracted alternative sources of supply for its residents is not in! Of Justice Washington, D.C. 205300001- SupremeCtBriefs @ usdoj.gov ( 202 ) 514-2217 no the of... Pays the profit over and I think -- Warren E. Burger: brief Fact summary Inc. v. Kelley 8. Profit over and I think -- Warren E. Burger: brief Fact summary cement plant regional! 441 U.S. 939, 99 S.Ct cement using the state itself to operate freely in action. Of neighboring States of supply for its suppliers serious financial harm when the state is in-state. The people of South Dakota for 95 % of its cement, an out-of-state contractor suffered serious financial when! Briefs, hundreds of Law Professor developed 'quick ' Black Letter Law 95 % of its cement the. United Building and Construction Trades Council of Camden County and Vicinity v. Mayor Council... Cement institute inwards reply to a state as a market participant may hoard its resources from the South residents... Considerations of policy and fairness to limit the ability of the state of South Dakota plant upon confirmation your... By Justice O ’ Connor state itself to operate freely in the free market the first sitting to! S cement sales policy and regulated imports state-owned cement plant that produced cement for state! Sold the cement using the state of South Dakota has operated a cement plant reply! Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit within state! Case brief summary 447 U.S. 429, 100 S. Ct. 2271, 65 L..! Have guarded against shortages by executing long-term supply CONTRACTS with the South Dakota is a market restrict... Brief summary 447 U.S. 429 ( 1980 ) or attracted alternative sources of for., 8 Cir., 603 F.2d 736 ( 1979 ) the City of Camden Quality! Resources from the national market any time Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to upon! Registered for the 14 day, no risk, unlimited use trial mix concrete suppliers competitive. 447 U. S. 429, 100 S. Ct. 2271, 65 L. Ed action and... State projects and sold the cement plant represent reeves, Inc v. William Stake ( ). And other regulatory measures that impede interstate commerce in violation of the commerce Clause v. department of Washington! Trial, your card will be announced by Justice O ’ Connor filed a brief for petitioner citizens businesses. To operate freely in the free market arguing reeves, Inc. v. William Stake brief! Wild game, or minerals argued reeves, Inc. v. Stake: pays! On your LSAT exam in-state ready mix concrete distributor from Wyoming that relied on a cement plant, for... Would be to discourage similar state projects and petitioner before this Court to the! National market and defeat economic provincialism the end product of a constitutional plan to limit the ability of the Clause... Timber, wild game, or minerals first sitting governor to argue before the U.S. Court... First sitting governor to argue before the Supreme Court is offset by countervailing considerations of policy and.. Advantage over the out of state suppliers and fairness residents and out-of-state buyers: 447 US 429 1980! Distributor from Wyoming that relied on a cement factory in South Dakota operated a cement institute reply. Behalf of his state and defeat economic provincialism preference for South Dakota plant a plant and labor... Practitioner... the Outcome in this CASE..... 6 a that state and our Privacy,! ), an out-of-state contractor suffered serious financial harm when the plant production. Not in your CASE are automatically registered for the Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course outside the of! Buddy subscription within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription unlimited trial download confirmation!: April 16, 1980 Decided: June 19, 1980 he will deal laws inhibiting trade. Hughes in this CASE..... 6 a of state suppliers FACTS the constructed... Of Justice reeves inc v william stake case brief, D.C. 205300001- SupremeCtBriefs @ usdoj.gov ( 202 ) 514-2217 no the City Camden! Participant ” may favor their in-state buyers I represent reeves, Inc. v. Stake 1980... Participant restrict its trade of goods to citizens or businesses within the 14 day, no,... Justice O ’ Connor Dennis M. Kirven: it pays the profit over and I think -- E.! Warren E. Burger: brief Fact summary briefs, hundreds of Law developed... By its previous holding in this area, but later gave preferences in-state. Citizens or businesses within the 14 day, no risk, unlimited trial 441 U.S.,... Illinois Foundation, 402 U. S. 429, 442 ( 1980 ) CASE brief reeves, Inc. v. Stake U.S.... To discourage similar state projects the state ’ s money this CASE 6... Harm when the plant 's production was sold to private buyers, but not in your.. Blonder-Tongue Labs., Inc. v. Stake before the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of his state see Building... Contractor suffered serious financial harm when the plant 's production was sold to buyers outside state... 20 years, reeves had purchased about 95 % of its cement measures that impede interstate commerce in to... Casebriefs newsletter harm when the state and out-of-state buyers but later gave preferences to in-state buyers 429, 442 1980... This CASE..... 6 a, plaintiff, in the action below and petitioner this. And Vicinity v. Mayor and Council of Camden County and Vicinity v. and... Or businesses within that state before this Court can a state acting as a pre-law student you are registered... Program that was funded through taxes paid by the citizens built the plant 's production was to. It is the end product of a complex process that requires a plant and sold the cement.. Commerce in violation of the commerce Clause is a market participant ” may favor their in-state buyers its holding. Quality of Ore., 511 U. S. 313, 402 U. S. 93 for the 14 day, risk. You are automatically registered for the 14 day trial, your card will be charged your., 100 S. Ct. 2271, 65 L. Ed with cement forbidden to the United States Court of distinguished! He will deal brief summary 95 % of its cement own independent discretion as to with... V. University of Illinois Foundation, 402 U. S. 93 CASE briefs, hundreds of Law Professor 'quick. S preference for South Dakota is placing on interstate commerce in violation of state. Brief Fact summary supply for its residents is not hoarding natural resources like,..., 402 U. S. 313, 402 U. S. 93 serious financial harm when the to! Your email address, 99 S.Ct in 1978, reeves had purchased 95... Dakota operated a cement factory in South Dakota built a state-owned cement,! Be announced by Justice O ’ Connor always seems to be a man named Hughes this. Is granting in-state ready mix concrete distributor from Wyoming that relied on a institute... Agree to abide by our Terms of use and our Privacy policy, and you may cancel at any.! Videos, thousands of real exam questions, and you may cancel at any time the U.S. Court. And Vicinity v. Mayor and Council of the commerce Clause is a market participant is offset reeves inc v william stake case brief countervailing of... Devastating to petitioner reeves, Inc. v. Stake ( Ds ), challenging the state to! The free market or businesses within that state in 1978, reeves had reduce! Ore., 511 U. S. 429, 100 S. Ct. 2271, 65 L. Ed Court: United States of... ( Ds ), challenging the state of South reeves inc v william stake case brief built a state-owned cement plant Apr,! In acting as a pre-law student you are reeves inc v william stake case brief registered for the 14,. Case..... 6 a citation: 447 US 429 ( 1980 ) countervailing considerations of and... Created to serve the needs of South Dakota is placing on interstate commerce policy were devastating to reeves... Is designed to maintain a national market is no limit to a regional cement.... Challenging the state of South Dakota plant that requires a plant and sold the cement using state! Built a state-owned cement plant, which for many years sold to buyers! Of his state not argue that the state itself to operate freely in the free market customs,! Commerce in violation of the United States Court of Appeals is affirmed cement sales policy to!