Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Cottrell 424 U.S. 366 (1976)
GREAT ATLANTIC & PACIFIC TEA CO. v. COTTRELL 424 U.S. 366 (1976)
Mississippi allowed the resale of milk from another state only if that state reciprocally accepted Mississippi milk. a. & p. stores were refused a permit to sell Louisiana milk in Mississippi, even though Louisiana milk satisfied all Mississippi quality standards, because Louisiana had not entered a reciprocity agreement with Mississippi. Citing dean milk co. v. madison (1951), the Supreme Court, 8–0, held that the Mississippi law was an unconstitutional state regulation of commerce. The law severely burdened interstate commerce without significantly promoting public health objectives; sales of Louisiana milk would have been allowed in the state if Louisiana had signed a reciprocity agreement. Mississippi could not "use the threat of economic isolation" to force other states into such agreements.
Kenneth L. Karst
(1986)