Laserfiche WebLink
RELEVANT LINKS: <br />League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 1/4/2016 <br />Regulating Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants Page 16 <br />This provision both: (1) grants the federal government a tremendous amount <br />of authority over what would otherwise be local issues; and (2) limits what <br />cities may do when their regulations might affect the movement of goods <br />between states. The Commerce Clause substantially impacts the regulation <br />of itinerant salespersons by local governments. <br />C & A Carbone, Inc. v. Town <br />of Clarkstown, 511 U.S. 383, <br />114 S. Ct. 1677 (1994). <br />Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. <br />Dias, 468 U.S. 263, 104 S. <br />Ct. 3049 (1984). <br />The Commerce Clause prohibits state and local laws that promote local <br />economic protection. An ordinance may establish local protectionism <br />because of either a discriminatory purpose or discriminatory effect. The U.S. <br />Supreme Court has invalided regulations that: <br />Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. <br />418 (1870). •Required only nonresident merchants to obtain licenses. <br />•Charged higher fees to nonresidents. <br />•Prohibited merchants from using nonresidents as salespersons. <br />These decisions are based in part upon the belief that the government may <br />not prevent someone from traveling state-to-state to earn a living. <br />Oregon Waste Sys. Inc. v. <br />Dept. of Envtl. Quality of the <br />State of Or., 511 U.S. 93, 114 <br />S.Ct. 1345 (1994). <br />State v. Schmidt, 280 Minn. <br />281, 159 N.W.2d 113 (1968). <br />A local regulation is discriminatory if it provides different treatment to in- <br />state and out-of-state economic interests, benefiting the former and <br />burdening the later. Restrictions that discriminate on interstate commerce are <br />virtually per se invalid. For example, just as with equal protection <br />challenges, a city ordinance that only required nonresident transient <br />merchants to post a bond was an unreasonable burden on interstate <br />commerce and unconstitutional. <br />State v. Schmidt, 280 Minn. <br />281, 159 N.W.2d 113 (1968). Courts have held that formal licensing procedures and fees for solicitors, <br />involved in interstate commerce (orders delivered from a different state at a <br />later time) amount to an undue burden on commerce and violate the U.S. <br />Constitution. Since residents and non-residents must be treated equally <br />under the law, a prohibition on regulating out-of-state merchants creates a <br />situation where in-state merchants may not be licensed as well. <br />Wagner v. Covington, 251 <br />U.S. 95, 40 S. Ct. 93 (1919). Peddlers and transient merchants have their goods within the state before the <br />commercial transaction begins. Because of this, cities that license these <br />classifications are not affecting interstate commerce. <br />D.Freedom of religion <br />U.S. Const. amend. I. <br />Minn. Const. art. I, § 16. Freedom of religion is a constitutionally-protected right under the First <br />Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Minnesota Constitution. <br />Int’l Soc’y for Krishna <br />Consciousness v. City of <br />Houston, 689 F.2d 541 (5th <br />Cir. 1982). <br />Various forms of conduct can fall within an individual’s freedom of religion, <br />from pure speech, the sale of religious materials, or the request for <br />donations. Cities must use caution when attempting to regulate religious <br />solicitors because of their First Amendment rights to free speech and the free <br />exercise of religion.