## Facts

- Michigan law required a flat $100 annual fee for each truck operated by a motor carrier that conducted intrastate commercial hauling in Michigan.
- The fee applied to trucks making point-to-point hauls between Michigan cities, including trucks also used for interstate operations.
- The fee was characterized as regulatory and intended to defray costs of administering Michigan’s motor-carrier regulatory program (including size, weight, and safety regulation).
- A motor-carrier trade association and an interstate trucking company that sometimes performed intrastate hauls challenged the fee under the dormant Commerce Clause.
- Petitioners argued the fee effectively disadvantaged interstate carriers because mixed interstate/intrastate trucks typically performed fewer intrastate miles than purely local carriers but paid the same per-truck amount.
- Petitioners did not produce evidence that the $100 fee substantially deterred interstate operations or imposed a significant practical burden on interstate trade.

## Issues

1. Whether a flat, per-truck annual fee imposed only on trucks engaged in intrastate hauling violates the dormant Commerce Clause by discriminating against interstate commerce.
2. Whether the fee unduly burdens interstate commerce because interstate carriers may perform fewer intrastate miles per dollar of fee than local carriers.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the state court judgment and upheld the fee.
- The Court held the fee did not violate the dormant Commerce Clause because it applied only to intrastate transactions and did not facially discriminate against interstate or out-of-state interests.
- The Court found no evidence of special circumstances showing the fee operated as a protectionist measure or imposed a substantial burden on interstate commerce.
- The Court accepted that a per-truck assessment could reasonably relate to regulatory and administrative costs, which may vary by truck or carrier rather than by miles traveled.
- The decision was unanimous; Justice Breyer wrote the opinion of the Court, with separate concurrences by Justices Scalia and Thomas.

## Legal Principles

- A state may impose neutral, evenhanded fees tied to local regulatory programs on intrastate activity without offending the dormant Commerce Clause.
- A charge limited to intrastate transactions, not attempting to reach extraterritorial activity, is less likely to trigger dormant Commerce Clause invalidation absent discrimination or substantial burden.
- A flat fee is not unconstitutional solely because some affected entities (such as interstate carriers that also perform intrastate hauls) obtain fewer intrastate miles per dollar than others, absent proof of discriminatory purpose, discriminatory operation, or excessive burden on interstate commerce.
- Courts may credit reasonable legislative or regulatory judgments that per-unit (per-truck) fees can reflect administrative and enforcement costs.

## Conclusion

Michigan’s $100 annual per-truck fee for engaging in intrastate hauling was upheld as a neutral, intrastate-focused regulatory assessment that neither discriminated against interstate commerce nor imposed an undue burden under the dormant Commerce Clause.


Am. Trucking Ass’ns, Inc. v. Mich. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 545 U.S. 429 (2005)