Reference no: EM132118319
Phil owns PBT Pecan Farms Inc. He employs five people as sales agents to sell his pecans which he only sells within New Mexico. Congress passed a new federal statute in 2009 that imposes new safety regulations on the pecan industry. The New Mexico legislature also passed new safety regulation legislation on the pecan industry in its 2008 session. The New Mexico regulations are stricter than the federal regulations. The regulations raise the cost of harvesting pecans and thus, Phil raises the price on all of his pecan products. To register his unhappiness with the new added administrative costs, Phil attaches a label to all of his pecan products identifying the recent legislation and requesting that people contact appropriate legislators, both state and federal to suggest revoking the statutes. Buddy Reeves, the county attorney reads PBT’s label on a bag of pecans offered for sale in the local grocery store and decides it is inflammatory and files a complaint against Phil and PBT. Pursuant to Buddy’s request, the local sheriff goes to PBT’s warehouse without obtaining a warrant and seizes all of the packaged pecans bearing the alleged inflammatory statement.
The question of whether or not PBT can attach the label identifying the New Mexico statute and suggesting customers contact appropriate legislators to complain about the statute raises what Bill of Rights legal protections?
None of the answers are correct.
First Amendment rights.
Sixth Amendment rights.
Fourth Amendment rights.
Fifth Amendment rights.
New Mexico may pass regulations for New Mexican pecan producers that are stricter than the federal regulations so long as:
The state regulations do not impede interstate commerce.
The state regulations are constitutional and do not preempt the federal regulations.
None of the answers are correct
The state regulations do not conflict with the intent of the federal regulations or interfere in an area that is otherwise regulated by the federal regulation.
All of the answers are correct.
The sheriff’s confiscation of the pecans from PBT’s warehouse may raise which issues?
The sheriff was acting pursuant to the county attorney’s orders and thus there can not be any Constitutional or other legal issue.
The sheriff’s search of the premise without a warrant and seizure of the pecans may have violated PBT’s Fourth Amendment rights.
The seizure of the pecans represents a Sixth Amendment takings issue.
The sheriff does not represent a state actor and thus there can not be a Fourth Amendment violation.
Two of the answers are correct.