A Wisconsin statute forbids the sale of milk within the state unless the pasteurization plant has been inspected. The statute provides for inspection of out-of-state plants by Wisconsin inspectors at the expense of the plant owner. The state law also permits municipalities to set up their own inspection systems for milk. The city of Madison, Wisconsin, pursuant to that statute, forbids the sale of milk within the city limits unless the plant has been inspected by city inspectors. Inspectors from Madison desire to inspect the plant of the Good Milk Company, an out-of-state milk producer, at company expense, shortly after the company has paid for an inspection by the state of Wisconsin. What is the best argument for the Good Milk Company that the statute is unconstitutional to the extent that it requires the company to pay for a second inspection?
A. The costs of the inspection are substantial.
B. The inspection standards were not approved by the federal government.
C. The Madison inspectors are politically appointed and have no expertise in inspecting plants.
D. The city of Madison accepts the results of state inspections for plants located in Wisconsin, but outside of the Madison city limits.
{ 7 comments }
