State of Confusion

State of Confusion Paper
BUS/415
December 4, 2011
Thomas Kohler, Instructor

State of Confusion
      The state of Confusion enacted a state statute requiring trucks and towing trailers that use their highways to use a B-type truck hitch.   For trucking company owner, Tanya Trucker, it becomes necessary to acquire additional expenses for their business, although her company’s location resides in the state of Denial. Tanya becomes determined to overturn this statute by filing a suit against the state of Confusion. In this report, what court will have jurisdiction over Tanya’s suit and why becomes imperative, and whether the Confusion statute becomes constitutional becomes important. Also, what provisions of the United States Constitution will become applied by a court to determine the statute’s validity; the likelihood of Tanya to prevail on her suit; and the details in the stages of a civil suit will become apparent.

Court Jurisdiction over Tanya’s Suit
  The court system possessing jurisdiction over Tanya’s suit becomes the federal courts, such as the United States District Court. The federal court system enforces laws pertaining to individuals, businesses, and other organizations within the United States. The federal court system also enforces laws regarding the U.S. Constitution, state, and federal statutes, ordinances, and other judicial decisions. Therefore, in this case, the federal court has jurisdiction over the two states, which falls under the diversity of citizenship assuming the controversy exceeds over $75,000.   Because the state statute pertains to trucks and towing on highways, this case falls under federal government pertaining to interstate commerce between two states. The state of Confusion enacted the statute; however, Tanya’s trucking business resides in the state of Denial.

Is the Confusion State Statue Constitutional?
      States possess the legal right to enact state statutes by the legislative branch. Although the federal... [continues]

Read full essay