Vikings Stadium Case Summary

Words: 1142
Pages: 5

11014474
Question 1: The Vikings’ stadium implemented a policy that requires people who purchase tickets for the Vikings-Packers game to also purchase tickets for two other preseason Vikings games. Respondent Aaron Nelson argues that the policy is a state tax that violates the Commerce Clause. Nelson argues that since the NFL is an interstate industry, it can only be regulated by taxes from Congress. The legal question in this case that the Court must address is whether or not the “packaged-deal” policy of the Vikings’ stadium is a regulatory tax that violates the Commerce Clause. The answer to this question is that this tax does not violate the Commerce Clause for the following reasons. Firstly, Aaron Nelson argues that the purpose of the tax is not to raise revenue, as suggested by the stadium policy, but to regulate the activity of buying tickets for the Vikings-Packers rival game. Nelson argues that states cannot engage in this type of regulation of interstate commerce. However, the precedent from
…show more content…
Lime opened his marijuana dispensary three months after the State of Grace enacted its law to make medicinal marijuana legal. The law does include a provision that allows local governments to withdraw from the government program, which the City of Utopia, where Dr. Lime’s dispensary is located, has enacted. Under the precedent from Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, Dr. Lime would be entitled to compensation. In the Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council case, the only way the government would not be required to compensate Lucas, would be if construction was prohibited under the title. The situation in this case is similar in that the ordinance exempting Utopia’s participation in the marijuana program was enacted after Dr. Lime’s shop had already opened. There was nothing forbidding him from doing it before. The city has the right to regulate Dr. Lime’s sale of medicinal marijuana, but regulatory takings still require compensation by the