Held that the regulation was unconstitutional.
Burden interstate sales and discriminating agains them
The challenged statute has the practical effect of not only
burdening interstate sales of Washington apples, but also
discriminating against them.
Forms of Discrimination
Raising costs of doing business for Washing apple growers
The statute's consequence of raising the costs of doing business
in the North Carolina market for Washington apple growers and
Leaves North Carolina unaffected
While leaving those of their North Carolina counterparts
North Carolina apple producers were not forced to alter their
marketing practices in order to comply with the statute.
They were still free to market their [apples] under the
USDA grade or none at all
as they had done prior to the statute's enactment.
Shields local apply industry from Washington Competition
The increased costs imposed by the statute would tend to shield
the local apple industry from the competition of Washington
apple growers and dealers who are already at a
because of their great distance from the North Carolina market.
Stripping away Washingtons competitive and economic advantages
The statute has the effect of stripping away from the Washington
apple industry the competitive and economic advantages it has
earned for itself through its
expensive inspection and grading system.
Washingtons apple-grading system has gained nationwide
acceptance in the apple trade.
Apple brokers and dealers located both inside and outside of
North Carolina who state their preference, and that of their
customers, for apples graded under the Washington, as opposed to
the USDA system, because of the [Washingtons] greater
No Similar Impact on Local Industry
Once again, the statute had no similar impact on the North
Carolina apple industry and thus operated to its benefit.
The Statute has a leveling effect that is advantageous to local
Washington sellers would normally enjoy a distinct market
advantage vis-a-vis local producers in those categories where
the Washington grade is superior.
Washington grades will now have to be marketed under their
inferior USDA counterparts.
Downgrading the grade is prohibited by the Commerce Clause
Such "downgrading" offers the North Carolina apple industry the
very sort of protection against competing out-of-state products
that the Commerce Clause
was designed to prohibit.
Embargo and Deprivation effect against Washington
At worst, it will have the effect of an embargo against those
Washington apples in the superior grades as Washington dealers
withhold them from the North Carolina market.
At best, it will deprive Washington sellers of the market
premium that such apples would otherwise command.
Statute does not protect against confusion and marketing
The several States unquestionably possess a substantial interest
in protecting their citizens from confusion and deception in the
marketing of foodstuffs
Can Market under not grades at all
The statute permits the marketing of closed containers of apples
under no grades at all.
[This statute] can hardly be thought to eliminate the problems
of deception and confusion created by the multiplicity of
differing state grades
It magnifies them by depriving purchasers of all information
concerning the quality of the contents of closed apple
Could have used nondiscriminatory alternatives
North Carolina could effectuate its goal by permitting
out-of-state growers to utilize state grades only if they also
marked their shipments with the applicable USDA label.
In that case, the U.S.D.A.
grade would serve as a benchmark against which the
consumer could evaluate the quality of the various state grades.
The Court finally held that the statute both burdened and
discriminated against the interstate sale of apples and that
appellant did not meet the burden of demonstrating substantial
local benefits flowing from the statute and the unavailability
of nondiscriminatory alternatives adequate to preserve local