Skip to main content

Does Utah violate the commerce clause of the U. S. Constitution by requiring back up cameras and warning signals on trucks?

Valrico, FL |

Nevada and California also passed a law requiring the same. This question is for research purposes

Attorney Answers 4


  1. Not in my opinion.

    ***Please be sure to mark if you find the answer "helpful" or a "best" answer. Thank you! I hope this helps. ******


  2. No. California is one of several states with different and stricter emissions standards on auto's. Not found to be unconstitutional.

    www.court-martial.com; www.court-martial.us.com; mljucmj@gmail.com 703-298-9562, 800-401-1583. Answering your question does not create an attorney-client relationship.


  3. Are you a law student writing a student note?

    Start here:

    41 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 1 (discussion of dormant commerce clause cases)

    Although AVVO has its own disclaimer, please be aware that any advice I offer on this website does not create an attorney client relationship. You should consult your own attorney directly.


  4. Bibb v. Navajo Freight Line, 359 U.S. 520 (1959), helps clarify the circumstances in which these regulations will be sustained. There, Illinois required tractor trailers to be equipped with a particular design mud flap. The design commanded by state law was such that trucks legal in Illinois would be illegal in Arkansas which had a differing required design mudflap.

    Take a look at the decision there, and then follow the commentary trail after it.

    This answer is not a substitute for consulting with and retaining the services of an attorney for your legal needs. By providing this answer, I am not entering into an attorney client relationship with you.

Transportation law topics

Top tips from attorneys

What others are asking

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer

Browse all legal topics