Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Dean Milk Co. v. City of Madison

Supreme Court of the United States · 1951 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawPropertyDormant Commerce ClauseLocal health regulationMilk regulationCommerce ClauseDormant Commerce Clausediscrimination against interstate commerce

Facts

Madison adopted an ordinance making it unlawful to sell milk as pasteurized unless it had been processed and bottled at an approved pasteurization plant within five miles of the city's central square, and also limiting the city's inspection obligation for farms beyond twenty-five miles. Dean Milk, an Illinois corporation, bought milk from farms in Illinois and Wisconsin and pasteurized it at plants 65 and 85 miles from Madison. Dean was denied a license to sell in Madison solely because its plants were outside the five-mile area, even though its milk came from farms and plants licensed and inspected by Chicago authorities and labeled Grade A under Chicago's ordinance. Madison argued the ordinance promoted convenient, economical, and efficient inspection and assumed its standards were in some respects more rigorous than Chicago's.

Issue

Whether Madison's ordinance, especially its five-mile pasteurization requirement, violated the Commerce Clause by discriminating against interstate commerce despite being justified as a health measure. Also, after resolving that question, whether the challenge to the twenty-five-mile inspection limitation required further consideration.

Rule

Even where Congress has not regulated the field and a municipality acts for health and safety purposes, it may not impose a discriminatory burden on interstate commerce if reasonable nondiscriminatory alternatives adequate to protect legitimate local interests are available. A local regulation that in practical effect excludes out-of-state goods and erects an economic barrier protecting a local industry is invalid under the Commerce Clause.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

The City of Springfield, Illinois, adopts an ordinance forbidding the sale of any packaged fresh juice unless it is bottled at a plant within four miles of city hall. Lark Valley Beverages, based in Missouri, uses a bottling plant in St. Louis and offers to pay Springfield the actual cost of inspecting that plant, but the city denies a permit solely because the plant is outside the four-mile zone.

If Lark Valley challenges the ordinance under the Commerce Clause, which is the strongest argument that the ordinance is unconstitutional?

Explanation. The controlling rule is that a municipality may not impose a discriminatory burden on interstate commerce, even for health and safety purposes, if reasonable nondiscriminatory alternatives adequate to protect legitimate local interests are available. A proximity requirement that effectively excludes out-of-state goods is an economic barrier. The majority specifically identified seller-funded distant inspections as a reasonable alternative, so Springfield's flat geographic exclusion would be invalid.