Ballast water discharges from shipping vessels are responsible for spreading numerous forms of aquatic invasive species, a form of biological pollution that leads to billions of dollars in annual costs. In the wake of inaction from the federal government and inaction from the shipping industry, several Great Lakes states are currently considering legislation to address the problem. Michigan has already passed a law to prevent ballast water introductions of invasive species. As states begin to regulate ballast water discharges from oceangoing vessels, such laws will likely face challenges based on the constitutional principles of the Dormant Commerce Clause and the federal preemption doctrine of the Supremacy Clause. This Note contends that state ballast water laws do not violate either the Dormant Commerce Clause or the Supremacy Clause. States can regulate ballast water discharges without violating the Dormant Commerce Clause because state regulations in this area do not discriminate against interstate commerce, and, even if they did, courts allow discrimination in this context. Under the Supremacy Clause, federal law does not preempt state regulation of ballast water discharges. Although federal regulation of onboard equipment might impose some limitations on similar state regulations, federal law does not preempt states from preapproving certain methods for treating ballast water.
October 2007 Vol. 106 No. 1 THE REVIEW
Noontime Dumping: Why States Have Broad Discretion to Regulate Onboard Treatments of Ballast Water
//
VIEW PDF
PAST ISSUES
of The Review
The Online Companion
CURRENT FEATURES
RESPONSES
& Other Current Events
Writing Competition Panel Audio Recording
On Tuesday, April 4, members of the Michigan Law Review discussed the 2012 writing competition and the...Agency and Equity: Why Do We Blame Clients for Their Lawyers' Mistakes?
If you were to ask a child whether it would be fair to execute a prisoner because his lawyer had made...How United States v. Jones Can Restore Our Faith in the Fourth Amendment
United States v. Jones, issued in January of this year, is a landmark case that has the potential to restore...Who's Bringing the Children?: Expanding the Family Exemption for Child Smuggling Offenses
Under immigration law, an alien smuggling offense takes place when one knowingly encourages, induces,...How the Gun-Free School Zones Act Saved the Individual Mandate
For all the drama surrounding the Commerce Clause challenge to the individual mandate provision...
MAILING LIST
Sign Up to Join Our Mailing List