Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

State of North Dakota v. Beverly Heydinger

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided June 15, 2016No. 14-2156, 14-2251Published

1Concurring in the judgmentMurphy, Circuit Judge

I respectfully disagree with Judge Lo-ken’s extraterritoriality analysis. The challenged provisions in the Next Generation Energy Act would regulate entities outside Minnesota only if those entities “import” electric power into Minnesota or enter into power purchase agreements that result in power being imported into Minnesota. These provisions would not regulate commerce “that takes place wholly outside of [Minnesota’s] borders.” For these reasons I disagree with Judge Loken’s conclusion that the provisions have an unconstitutional extraterritorial effect. See Healy v. Beer Inst., 491 U.S.…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
  4. Clark v. MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  5. Healy v. Beer InstituteSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API