Jump to content

Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission
Argued February 22, 1977
Decided June 20, 1977
Full case nameHunt, Governor of North Carolina, et al. v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission
Citations432 U.S. 333 (more)
97 S. Ct. 2434; 53 L. Ed. 2d 383; 1977 U.S. LEXIS 123
Case history
PriorWashington State Apple Advertising Comm'n v. Holshouser, 408 F. Supp. 857 (E.D.N.C. 1976)
Holding
North Carolina violated the Commerce Clause by discriminating against out-of-state apple growers.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart
Byron White · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens
Case opinion
MajorityBurger, joined by unanimous court
Rehnquist took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art. I § 8 cl. 3 (Commerce Clause)

Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission, 432 U.S. 333 (1977), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously struck down a North Carolina law prohibiting the sale of apples in closed containers marked with any apple grade other than the United States Department of Agriculture grade.[1] However, displaying the USDA grade was not required. Washington state, a major apple producer, used apple standards superior to those used by the USDA. The Court found that North Carolina's law violated the Commerce Clause because they discriminated against Washington state apple producers while working to the advantage of local North Carolina apple growers.

John R. Jordan, Jr., argued the cause for Hunt. With him on the brief were Rufus L. Edmisten, Attorney General of North Carolina, and Millard R. Rich, Jr., Deputy Attorney General. Slade Gorton, Attorney General of Washington, argued the cause for the Washington State Apple Advertising Commission. With him on the brief were Edward B. Mackie, Deputy Attorney General, and James Arneil, Special Assistant Attorney General.

The Supreme Court decision established the concept of association standing, which allows for an association (in this case, the Commission) that represents one or more parties that have demonstrable injury to bring the case to trial with standing under Article III.[1]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]