C&A Carbone, Inc. v. Clarkstown

Brief Fact Summary.

The town of Clarkstown in New York adopted the flow control ordinance requiring all nonhazardous solid waste within the town to be deposited at the transfer station. The petitioner, who sought to ship its nonrecyclable waste to cheaper processors outside the state rather than to the new facility as required, challenged the ordinance.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

Discrimination against interstate commerce in favor of local business or investment is per se invalid.

Facts.

The town of Clarkstown in New York agreed to close its landfill and build a new solid waste transfer station, of which the estimated cost of building was $1.4 million. The town made a contract with a local private contractor to construct the facility. To meet the payment guarantee, the town adopted the flow control ordinance, which required all nonhazardous solid waste within the town to be deposited at the transfer station. The petitioner, a private recycler with a sorting facility in Clarkstown, sought to ship its nonrecyclable waste to cheaper processors outside the state rather than to the new facility as required.

Issue.

Does the town ordinance that requires all nonhazardous solid waste within the town to be deposited at the transfer station and forbids any out-of-the state deposit violate the Constitution?

Held.

Yes, the town ordinance that requires all nonhazardous solid waste within the town to be deposited at the transfer station and forbids any out-of-the state deposit violates the Constitution, because by preventing everyone except the favored local operator from performing the waste processing step, the ordinance deprives out-of-state businesses of access to a local market.

Dissent.

Justice Souter

Subjecting out-of-town investors and facilities to the same constraints as local ones is not economic protectionism and does not constitute a prohibited discrimination. The ordinance only seeks to distinguish between two classes of private economic actors according to geography alone. Moreover, the local government enters the market to serve the public interest of local citizens unlike private interest in private gain. Thus, reasons other than economic protectionism are more likely to explain the effect of an ordinance that favors a public facility.

Concurrence.

Discussion.

The fact that the ordinance also applies to in-state or local processors does not make the law less discriminatory. This is because the law hoards solid waste, and the demand to get rid of it, for the benefit of the preferred local processing facility. Moreover, Clarkstown had many other nondiscriminatory alternatives for addressing the health and environmental problems alleged to justify the ordinance in question. The ordinance ensures that the town-sponsored facility would be profitable. Revenue generation, however, cannot be a local interest that justify discrimination against interstate commerce.