DOT *sigh* THIS IS OT and NON MV Mud flaps and federalism

From: Fred H. Schlesinger (fred@schlesingers.net)
Date: Thu Dec 15 2005 - 15:25:48 PST


I usually don't do this, go off on a on an OT rant in deference to Nige and some of the other limeys
on the list (sorry Guys) but just to mess with everyone's heads a little more, the US constitution
is the supreme law of the land here. Therefore, our Supreme Court has determined that Congress may
pre-empt an area of law that involves a federal question. Commerce between the states is such a
question. This came up when some states had differentlaws for mud flaps on trucks, and used their
rules to require that shippers use domestic carriers. Anyway, the Supreme Court decided that
congress may preempt (and thereby trump) rules that effect interstate commerce, and as the result,
we have the DOT. So don't be sure that a state can determine what trucks are classified how, or may
have more restrictive rules for trucks.

But Congress must manifest an intent to pre-empt the area in order to do so. I.e. The law must say
it preempts or the court must determine that federal regulation is so pervasive in an area that it
effectively pre-empts the area in order for federal regulations to prevail over state regulations.

As a further aside, the mud flaps case ended up being the pattern for all kinds of social
engineering legislation during the 60's WARREN court, like, for example, the Voting Rights Act,
Civil rights acts, the EPA, Wetlands, and all the other wonderful examples of federal overrunning of
so called States Rights.

So, when you say that a state can do what it wants, not so fast. 10,000 lawyers have to earn a
living somehow.

  

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark J. Blair, NF6X [mailto:nf6x@nf6x.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 11:18 PM
To: Military Vehicles Mailing List
Subject: Re: [MV] DOT *sigh*

Ryan Gill wrote:
> Timothy, in my speaking to the FMCSA folks both in the Atlanta Office
> and in the DC headquarters it's pretty clear that a lot of state
> agencies only make a differentiation based on weight and not on use of
> the vehicle.

California is one of those states. Class A or B commercial licenses are
required for vehicles which are classified as class A or class B
vehicles, respectively, under California law, whether the vehicles are
used for commercial purposes or not. CA also has a wider definition of
class B vehicles than federal regs do. For example, a 2.5-ton 6x6 would
require a class B CDL here.

Ironically, based on a lot of horror stories that have been hashed out
on the list, it seems that it's easier to get a lot of MVs registered
here in the People's Republic of California than in several other states.

Much like with gun laws, states make their own laws which may be more
strict than federal laws, and us poor schmoes need to tip-toe through a
minefield of often conflicting rules.

--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x@nf6x.net>
Web page: http://www.nf6x.net/
GnuPG public key available from my web page.

===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list=== To unsubscribe, send e-mail to <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org> To reach a human, contact <ackyle@gmail.com> Visit the searchable archives at http://www.mil-veh.org/archives/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 18 2006 - 21:37:08 PDT