Law Center Search Results

The NAM filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s affirmation of the dismissal of claims against Connecticut’s protectionist automobile dealer state legislation. The issue in this litigation is whether Connecticut’s prohibition on manufacturers from raising prices in Connecticut to account for added costs imposed by the state violates the Dormant Commerce Clause. This litigation is important because protectionism is anticompetitive, inconsistent with innovation and advancement, and harmful to consumers. The NAM’s brief argued that Connecticut’s legislation is protectionist and therefore anticompetitive, harms consumers and is implemented solely for the benefit of in-state dealers. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court declined review.