Garbage Makes Its Way to Supreme Court Two Cases before the Court Test Capacity of Cities, States to Regulate Disposal of Trash
James H. Andrews, writer of The Christian Science Monitor, The Christian Science Monitor
THE Supreme Court has garbage problems.
Today the justices of the nation's highest court are hearing arguments in one of several important trash-disposal cases they will decide this term.
The court must decide whether the Constitution's "commerce clause" limits the power of states and cities to regulate the treatment and disposal of trash that crosses state borders. The commerce clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, and it has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to prohibit state and local governments from imposing "undue burdens" on the interstate movement of goods and services.
One undue burden on interstate trade that the court has traditionally banned is discriminatory treatment between in-state and out-of-state goods or services.
In the case before the jurists today, Oregon levied a higher disposal fee on garbage originating out of state than on trash generated within its borders. The state says the fee covers only its costs, and that, because in-state producers of trash pay part of those costs through taxes and other fees, the higher out-of-state disposal fee is not discriminatory.
But Oregon faces an uphill battle to prevail, some legal experts say. Last term the court struck down a similar fee imposed by Alabama on out-of-state toxic chemical wastes. Lawyers for Oregon contend that its fee is more closely calibrated to actual disposal costs than the Alabama levy was, but some observers say the record doesn't support that assertion.
"In our view, Oregon hasn't proved that the fee differential is merely compensatory," says Bruce Parker, general counsel of the National Solid Wastes Management Association (NSWMA), a trade group in Washington that opposes the statute.
"The court could reject Oregon's argument on the ground that it would allow states to make out-of-staters pay more for other services, like the use of roads," says Charlotte Crane, a professor at Northwestern University Law School in Chicago. `Flow-control' ordinances
A more controversial and intensely watched garbage-disposal case was argued before the Supreme Court last month. At issue is the power of cities to enact "flow-control" ordinances requiring that all trash be processed at a designated municipal facility. Mr. Parker of the NSWMA says the flow-control case "deals with what's becoming a systemic feature of the way in which states and cities handle trash. …