South-Central Timber V. Wunnicke Case Study

Based on the need to assure the safety of their milk supply and protecting the health of adults and children who drink milk, the State of Iowa recently adopted new and strong milk safety standards. In fact, these new standards are among the toughest in the country, and have been reliably proven to make the milk supply safer than the safety standards utilized by other states. These new standards are designed to prevent people drinking the milk to suffer adverse health effects; however, the tough standards do not go without controversy and consequences. Because of the state’s adoption of these new milk safety standards, there will be an expense imposed on companies wanting to sell milk in Iowa, resulting in a forty million dollar cost each year
Wunnicke case, in some circumstances a state discriminatory means regulation can survive a Dormant Commerce Clause challenge. In Maine v. Taylor, the Supreme Court upheld a Maine prohibition on the importation of live-baitfish for fear of parasites not common to Main fisheries. As the author of the majority opinion of this case, Justice Blackmun wrote that discriminatory laws may be upheld only if they serve “legitimate local purposes that could not adequately be served by available nondiscriminatory alternatives.” A state may use discriminatory means to serve an appropriate state police power interest, i.e., protection of the state’s milk supply and the health of adults and children who drink milk. However, if such local health and safety considerations present barriers to the free flow of interstate commerce, then the Supreme Court is likely to become unmoved and the regulations will be foundered on the shoals of the Dormant Commerce
Although these new regulations will incidentally cost out-of-state dairies approximately forty-million-dollars, Iowa’s new milk safety goals are a valid state and local interest, and the State of Iowa itself is still acting as a dairy market participant. Furthermore, if Iowa’s new regulations equally affect dairy produced in-state and out-of-state, then such actions are permissible under the Dormant Commerce Clause and the contours of its express and implied preemption powers. However, if the state’s new milk regulations run counter to federal food regulation laws, such as those administered by the FDA in their PMO program, then Iowa’s state laws can be expressly and impliedly