exxon governor maryland argued february decided june together shell oil governor maryland et al continental oil et al governor maryland et al gulf oil governor maryland et al ashland oil et al governor maryland et also appeal responding evidence petroleum shortage oil producers refiners favoring gasoline stations maryland enacted statute prohibiting producers refiners operating retail service stations within state requiring extend voluntary allowances temporary price reductions granted independent dealers injured local competitive price reductions uniformly stations supply actions several oil companies challenging validity statute various grounds maryland trial held statute invalid primarily substantive due process grounds maryland appeals reversed upholding validity statute contentions inter alia violated commerce due process clauses conflicted clayton act amended act prohibits price discrimination proviso seller defend price discrimination charge showing charged lower price good faith meet competitor equally low price held maryland statute violate due process clause since regardless ultimate efficacy statute bears reasonable relation state legitimate purpose controlling gasoline retail market pp divestiture provisions statute violate commerce clause pp burden provisions falls solely interstate companies establish claim discrimination interstate commerce statute creates barrier interstate independent dealers prohibit flow interstate goods place added costs upon distinguish companies retail market hunt washington apple advertising dean milk madison distinguished pp fact burden state regulation falls interstate companies show statute impermissibly burdens interstate commerce even refiners stop selling state divestiture requirement even elimination stations deprive consumers certain special services interstate commerce subjected impermissible burden simply otherwise valid regulation causes business shift one interstate supplier another commerce clause protects interstate market particular interstate firms prohibitive burdensome regulations pp commerce clause force field retail gasoline marketing absent relevant congressional declaration policy showing specific discrimination burdening interstate commerce power regulate area pp voluntary allowances requirement maryland statute clayton act amended act sherman act pp hypothetical conflict arising possibility maryland statute may require uniformity situations act permit localized price discrimination sufficient warrant pp neither federal policy favoring competition establishes federal right engage discriminatory pricing certain situations section proviso merely exception statute broad prohibition discriminatory pricing create new federal right rather defines specific limited defense pp sense maryland statute might anticompetitive effect conflict statute sherman act central policy economic liberty nevertheless sort conflict constitute sufficient reason invalidating maryland statute adverse effect competition enough invalidate state statute power engage economic regulation effectively destroyed pp stevens delivered opinion burger brennan stewart white marshall rehnquist joined blackmun filed opinion concurring part dissenting part post powell took part consideration decision cases william simon argued cause appellants cases briefs appellants nos william marbury lewis noonberg david tufaro robert stern edward davis daniel doherty robert abrams lawrence greenwald bernard caillouet richard delaney lauric cusack jerry miller minotti wilbur preston stanley rohd andrew mccolpin richard linn filed brief appellants david ginsburg fred drogula james wesner filed briefs appellants francis burch attorney general maryland thomas wilson iii assistant attorney general argued cause respondents cases brief john oster deputy attorney general john woodstock steven resnick assistant attorneys fn briefs amici curiae urging reversal filed eugene gressman charter oil et al john mcdaniel william rubin crown petroleum jerry cohen filed brief national congress petroleum retailers amicus curiae urging affirmance briefs amici curiae filed evelle younger attorney general sanford gruskin chief assistant attorney general warren abbott assistant attorney general michael spiegel linda tedeschi deputy attorneys general state california erwin griswold champlin petroleum et al george liebmann robert levin robert levy day enterprises et al justice stevens delivered opinion maryland statute provides producer refiner petroleum products may operate retail service station within state must extend voluntary allowances uniformly service stations supplies questions presented whether statute violates either commerce due process clause constitution directly indirectly congressional expression policy favoring vigorous competition found clayton act stat amended act stat appeals maryland answered questions favor validity statute md affirm maryland statute outgrowth shortage petroleum response complaints inequitable distribution gasoline among retail stations governor maryland directed state comptroller conduct market survey results survey indicated gasoline stations operated producers refiners received preferential treatment period short supply comptroller therefore proposed legislation according appeals designed correct inequities distribution pricing gasoline reflected survey legislative hearings special veto hearing governor bill enacted signed law shortly effective date act exxon filed declaratory judgment action challenging statute circuit anne arundel county md essential facts alleged complaint dispute gasoline sold exxon maryland transported state refineries located elsewhere although exxon sells bulk gas wholesalers independent retailers also sells directly consuming public stations exxon uses stations test innovative marketing concepts products focusing primarily act requirement discontinue operation retail stations exxon complaint challenged validity statute constitutional federal statutory grounds ensuing nine months six oil companies instituted comparable actions three plaintiffs subsidiaries sell gasoline maryland exclusively stations refiners using trade names red head scot concentrate largely sales prices consistently lower offered independent major brand stations testimony presented refiners indicated company ownership essential method private brand competition therefore joined exxon attack divestiture provisions maryland statute three plaintiffs like exxon sell major brands primarily stations although also operate least one retail station challenged statute divestiture provisions addition specially challenged requirement voluntary allowances extended uniformly retail service stations supplied state although defined statute term voluntary allowances refers temporary price reductions granted oil companies independent dealers injured local competitive price reductions competing retailers oil companies regard temporary allowances legitimate price reductions protected advance trial exxon shell gulf moved partial summary judgment declaring portion act invalid conflict circuit granted motion trial focused validity divestiture provisions brought trial salient characteristics maryland retail gasoline market follows approximately retail service stations maryland sell different brands gasoline however petroleum products produced refined maryland number stations actually operated refiner affiliate relatively small representing total number maryland retailers refiners introduced evidence indicating ownership retail service stations produced significant benefits consuming public moreover three refiners market solely stations may elect withdraw maryland market altogether statute enforced however evidence total quantity petroleum products shipped maryland affected statute trial circuit held entire statute invalid primarily substantive due process grounds maryland appeals reversed rejecting refiners attacks divestiture provisions provision attacks pursued instead appellants focused appeals claims maryland statute violates due process commerce clauses conflict act ii appellants substantive due process argument requires little discussion evidence presented refiners may cast doubt wisdom statute absolutely clear due process clause empower judiciary sit superlegislature weigh wisdom legislation ferguson skrupa citation omitted responding evidence producers refiners favoring stations allocation gasoline eventually decrease competitiveness retail market state enacted law prohibiting producers refiners operating stations appellants argue response irrational frustrate rather state desired goal enhancing competition appeals observed argument rests simply evaluation economic wisdom statute override state authority legislate found injurious practices internal commercial business affairs lincoln federal labor union northwestern iron metal regardless ultimate economic efficacy statute hesitancy concluding bears reasonable relation state legitimate purpose controlling gasoline retail market therefore reject appellants due process claim iii appellants argue divestiture provisions maryland statute violate commerce clause three ways discriminating interstate commerce unduly burdening interstate commerce imposing controls commercial activity essentially interstate character amenable state regulation plainly maryland statute discriminate interstate goods favor local producers refiners since maryland entire gasoline supply flows interstate commerce since local producers refiners claims disparate treatment interstate local commerce meritless appellants however focus retail market arguing effect statute protect independent dealers competition contend divestiture provisions create protected enclave maryland independent dealers support proposition rely fact burden divestiture requirements falls solely interstate companies fact lead either logically practical matter conclusion state discriminating interstate commerce retail level record shows several major interstate marketers petroleum operate retail gasoline stations interstate dealers compete directly maryland independent dealers affected act refine produce gasoline fact act creates barriers whatsoever interstate independent dealers prohibit flow interstate goods place added costs upon distinguishes companies retail market absence factors fully distinguishes case state found discriminated interstate commerce see hunt washington apple advertising dean milk madison instance hunt noted challenged state statute raised cost business dealers various ways favored dealer local market comparable claim made refiners longer enjoy status maryland market independent dealers competitive advantage dealers fact burden state regulation falls interstate companies establish claim discrimination interstate commerce appellants argue however fact show maryland statute impermissibly burdens interstate commerce point evidence record indicates divestiture requirements least three refiners stop selling maryland also supports claim elimination stations deprive consumer certain special services even assume truth assertions neither warrants finding statute impermissibly burdens interstate commerce refiners may choose withdraw entirely maryland market reason assume share entire supply promptly replaced interstate refiners source consumers supply may switch stations independent dealers interstate commerce subjected impermissible burden simply otherwise valid regulation causes business shift one interstate supplier another crux appellants claim regardless whether state interfered movement goods interstate commerce interfered natural functioning interstate market either prohibition burdensome regulation hughes alexandria scrap appellants claim statute surely change market structure weakening independent refiners however accept appellants underlying notion commerce clause protects particular structure methods operation retail market see breard alexandria indicated hughes clause protects interstate market particular interstate firms prohibitive burdensome regulations may true consuming public injured loss stations operated independent refiners argument relates wisdom statute burden commerce finally adopt appellants novel suggestion economic market petroleum products state power regulate retail marketing gas appellants point many state legislatures either enacted considered proposals similar maryland cumulative effect sort legislation may serious implications national marketing operations concern significant one find commerce clause force field retail gas marketing sure commerce clause acts limitation upon state power even without congressional implementation hunt washington apple advertising supra rarely held commerce clause entire field state regulation lack national uniformity impede flow interstate goods see wabash illinois see also cooley board wardens evil appellants perceive litigation several enact differing regulations rather conclude divestiture provisions warranted problem thus one national uniformity absence relevant congressional declaration policy showing specific discrimination burdening interstate commerce conclude without power regulate area iv exxon phillips shell gulf contend requirement voluntary allowances extended retail service stations either direct conflict clayton act amended act generally conflict basic federal policy favor competition reflected sherman act well rejecting contentions maryland appeals noted maryland statute covered two different competitive situations first situation competing retailer lowers price oil company gives retailer price reduction enable meet lower price second situation competing retailer lower price subsidized supplier oil company gives retailer price reduction meet competition defense clearly available oil company first situation voluntary allowance response competition another oil company see ftc sun oil second situation law unsettled appeals concluded defense also unavailable therefore reasoned conflict maryland statute since statute apply allowance protected federal law opinion necessary decide whether defense apply second situation even assuming conflict maryland statute act sufficient require appellants first argument compliance maryland statute may cause violate act stress possibility requirement price reduction made statewide basis may result discrimination customers otherwise receive price describe various hypothetical situations illustrate point areas coincident federal state regulation teaching decisions enjoin seeking conflicts state federal regulation none clearly exists huron cement detroit seagram sons hostetter see also state texaco seagram sons went say lthough possible envision circumstances price discriminations proscribed act might compelled state statute existence potential conflicts entirely speculative present posture case warrant counsel restraint applies even greater force even delve hypothetical situations posed appellants presented state statute requires violation act instead alleged conflict possibility maryland statute may require uniformity situations act permit localized discrimination sort hypothetical conflict sufficient warrant appellants however also claim act simply permit localized discrimination actually establishes federal right engage discriminatory pricing certain situations argue federal right may found directly generally nation basic policy favoring competition reflected sherman act well find neither argument persuasive proviso clayton act amended act merely exception statute broad prohibition discriminatory pricing created new federal right quite contrary defined specific limited defense even narrowed defense previously existed sure defense important one interpretation contours informed underlying national policy favoring competition reflects illogical infer excluding certain competitive behavior general ban discriminatory pricing congress intended power prohibit conduct within exclusion generally reluctant infer see de canas bica merrill lynch pierce fenner smith ware particularly inappropriate case basic purposes state statute act similar reflect policy choice favoring interest equal treatment customers interest allowing sellers freedom make selective competitive decisions appellants point act may characterized exception qualification basic national policy favoring free competition argue maryland statute undermin es competitive balance congress struck sherman acts merely another way stating maryland statute anticompetitive effect sense conflict statute central policy sherman act charter economic liberty northern pacific nevertheless sort conflict constitute sufficient reason invalidating maryland statute adverse effect competition enough render state statute invalid power engage economic regulation effectively destroyed therefore satisfied neither broad implications sherman act act fairly construed congressional decision power maryland legislature enact law judgment affirmed ordered footnotes july producer refiner petroleum products shall open major brand secondary brand unbranded retail service station state maryland operate company personnel subsidiary company commissioned agent contract person firm corporation managing service station fee arrangement producer refiner station must operated retail service station dealer july producer refiner petroleum products shall operate major brand secondary brand unbranded retail service station state maryland company personnel subsidiary company commissioned agent contract person firm corporation managing service station fee arrangement producer refiner station must operated retail service station dealer every producer refiner wholesaler petroleum products supplying gasoline special fuels retail service station dealers shall extend voluntary allowances uniformly retail service station dealers supplied md code art supp upon proof made hearing complaint section discrimination price services facilities furnished burden rebutting case thus made showing justification shall upon person charged violation section unless justification shall affirmatively shown commission authorized issue order terminating discrimination provided however nothing herein contained shall prevent seller rebutting case thus made showing lower price furnishing services facilities purchaser purchasers made good faith meet equally low price competitor services facilities furnished competitor used appeals opinion station refers retail service station operated directly employees refiner producer petroleum products subsidiary instance exxon used stations introduce marketing ideas partial units vending machines app exxon presented nine arguments constitutional statutory contended statute arbitrary irrational due process clause constituted unconstitutional taking property without compensation denied two distinct ways equal protection laws constituted unlawful delegation legislative authority unconstitutionally vague discriminated burdened interstate commerce act federal emergency petroleum allocation act plaintiffs continental oil subsidiary kayo oil commonwealth oil refining subsidiary petroleum marketing ashland oil plaintiffs phillips petroleum shell oil gulf oil see appeals stated statute way restrict free flow petroleum products state evidence record directly support assertion certainly permissible inference drawn evidence lack thereof presented appellants see reply brief appellants see supra indeed although circuit decision rested primarily substantive due process claim appellants continental oil subsidiary kayo oil press claim worth noting divestiture means novel method economic regulation found federal state statutes date courts little difficulty sustaining statutes substantive due process attack see paramount pictures langer supp nd dismissed moot see generally comment gasoline marketing practices meeting competition act md rev brief appellants instance july interstate nonrefining companies sears roebuck hudson oil pantry pride operated retail gas stations maryland app hudson however recently acquired refinery see brief appellants effect state regulation cause local goods constitute larger share goods source constitute smaller share total sales market hunt dean milk regulation may discriminatory effect interstate commerce maryland statute impact relative proportions local goods sold maryland indeed demonstrable effect whatsoever interstate flow goods sales independent retailers much part flow interstate commerce sales made stations reply brief appellants california delaware district columbia florida adopted laws restricting refiners operation service stations similar proposals legislatures jurisdictions see brief appellants nn brief state california amicus curiae appeals also noted third competitive situation discriminatory price reduction made meet equally low price offered buyer competing seller lower view situation clearly fell within defense encompassed term voluntary allowances left question open sun oil lower courts reached conflicting results compare enterprise industries texas supp rev grounds cert denied bargain car wash standard oil indiana appellants argue compliance voluntary allowance provision may expose liability clayton act amended act respect liability pose hypothesis seller responds competitor lower price baltimore statute must lower prices throughout state even though competitive market justifying price confined baltimore appellants argue competitor operating salisbury may injured price reduction injury flowing uniform price reduction actionable act prohibits price discrimination see rowe price discrimination act thus appellants claim statute create liability premised possibility price differentials may arise stations located maryland neighboring respect claim sufficient note although maryland statute may affect business decision whether reduce prices create irreconcilable conflict act statute may require voluntary allowance legally confined baltimore area extended salisbury may assume arguendo act require extension allowance neighboring state possible scope voluntary allowance may therefore impact company decision whether meet competition baltimore state statute way require discriminatory prices see also supra section original clayton act stat established absolute defense seller reductions price made good faith meet competition legislative history act shows intended limit broad defense see standard oil ftc holding created substantive rather merely procedural defense explained heart national economic policy long faith value competition sherman clayton acts well act congress dealing competition sought protect monopoly sought prevent staley mfg federal trade need reconcile entirety economic theory underlies act sherman clayton acts enough say congress seek act either abolish competition radically curtail seller substantial right price raid competitor standard oil supra omitted political economic stimulus act perceived need protect independent retail stores chain stores see department justice report act maryland statute prompted perceived need protect independent retail service station dealers vertically integrated oil companies indeed many argued act fundamentally anticompetitive undermines purposes sherman act see generally department justice report supra brief appellants appellants argue maryland actually regulated beyond boundaries pointing possibility may extend voluntary allowances neighboring order avoid liability act see nn supra alleged effect arises act maryland statute justice blackmun concurring part dissenting part although agree maryland motor fuel inspection law offend substantive due process federal antitrust policy dissent part iii opinion fails condemn impermissible discrimination interstate commerce retail gasoline marketing divestiture provisions md code art supp hereinafter referred preclude competitors retailing gasoline within maryland effect protect retail service station dealers competition businesses protectionist discrimination justified legitimate state interest vindicated evenhanded regulation sections therefore violate commerce clause maryland retail marketing gasoline interstate commerce petroleum products come outside state retailers serve interstate travelers extent particular retailers succeed fail businesses interstate wholesale market petroleum products affected cf dean milk madison regulation retail gasoline sales therefore within scope commerce clause see ibid minnesota barber commerce clause forbids discrimination interstate commerce repeatedly held mean localities may discriminate transactions actors interstate markets hunt washington apple advertising halliburton oil well reily dean milk madison best maxwell discrimination need appear face state local regulation commerce clause forbids discrimination whether forthright ingenious case duty determine whether statute attack whatever name may practical operation work discrimination interstate commerce ibid omitted state local authority need intend discriminate order offend policy maintaining national economy demonstrated hunt statute face restricts intrastate interstate transactions may violate clause practical effect discriminating operation discrimination results statute burden falls upon state local government demonstrate legitimate local benefits justifying inequality show less discriminatory alternatives protect local interests dean milk madison merely accept without analysis purported local interests instead independently identifies character interests judges whether alternatives adequate example dean milk city attempted justify milk pasteurization ordinance claiming necessary health measure city assertion conclusive however different view ordinance valid simply professes health measure mean commerce clause imposes limitations state action laid due process clause save rare instance state artlessly discloses avowed purpose discriminate interstate goods ibid background unconstitutional discrimination maryland statute becomes apparent facial inequality exists preclude refiners producers marketing gasoline retail level given structure retail gasoline market maryland effect exclude class predominantly gasoline retailers providing protection competition class nonintegrated retailers overwhelmingly composed local businessmen gasoline service stations state operated nonintegrated local retail dealers app stations belonged integrated producers refiners operated nonintegrated companies affected immediately maryland statute ibid integrated petroleum firm crown central petroleum operated two service stations class stations statutorily insulated competition integrated firms operated local business interests class enterprises excluded entirely participation retail gasoline market firms operating stations class ibid discrimination suffered integrated producers refiners significant five excluded enterprises ashland oil bp oil kayo oil petroleum marketing southern cooperative market nonbranded gasoline price competition rather brand recognition stations marketing gasoline manner company operated company operations result dominant fact price competition marketing according repeated testimony petroleum economics experts officers price marketers testimony trial discredit nonbranded stations compete successfully control retail price products hours operation stations related business details app joint app jurisdictional statements et seq control sufficient sales volume achieved produce satisfactory profits prices two three cents gallon major branded stations dealer operation stations precludes control illegality vertical price fixing see ed white motor therefore forbid company operations competitors abandon maryland retail market altogether app joint app jurisdictional statements et seq reason national nonbranded integrated marketers operate stations without dealers precluded entering maryland retail gasoline market record also contains testimony discrimination burden operations major branded companies appellants exxon phillips shell gulf firms importantly preclude companies well mentioned previous paragraph competing directly profits retail marketing according richard harvin retail sales manager exxon eastern marketing region exxon stations maryland annually return company investment profit app sections force return shared local dealers addition ban sections preclude majors enhancing brand recognition consumer acceptance retail outlets standards ability directly monitor consumer preferences reactions diminished opportunity experimentation retail marketing techniques curtailed short divestiture provisions require appellant majors cease operation property valued million inflict significant economic hardship maryland major brand companies firms similar hardship imposed upon local service station dealers divestiture provisions indeed rather restricting ability compete maryland act effectively perhaps intentionally improves competitive position insulating competition integrated producers refiners answers various complaints case state repeatedly conceded act intended protect retail dealer independent businessman reducing control dominance vertically integrated petroleum producer refiner retail market see trial state expert said legislation effect protecting local dealers competition short foundation discrimination case local dealers may continue enter retail transactions compete retail profits statute deny similar opportunities class composed almost entirely businesses discrimination proved interstate commerce burden falls upon state justify distinction legitimate state interests vindicated evenhanded regulation record state fails carry burden asserts general terms desire maintain competition gasoline retailing although laudable goal accepted without analysis accept mere assertion public health justification dean milk state ignores second half responsibility even attempt demonstrate competition preserved without banning interests retail market state showing may meager legitimate interest competition vindicated evenhanded regulation first extent state interest competition nothing desire protect particular competitors less efficient local businessmen legal competition efficient firms interest illegitimate commerce clause national economy hardly flourish state effectively insist local nonintegrated dealers handle product retailing exclusion integrated firms sufficient local political clout challenge influence local businessmen local government leaders state encouraged legislate according estimate interests importance products local advantages disadvantages position political commercial view story commentaries constitution ed quoted hood sons du mond see also federalist nos hamilton madison commerce clause simply countenance parochialism second legitimate concern state limit economic power vertical integration nothing record suggests vertical integration already occurred maryland petroleum market inhibited competition indeed trial found retail market dominated dealer outlets constituting state service stations highly competitive therefore state shown need divestiture existing stations required legitimacy concern future integration support discrimination suspect exemption granted wholesalers surprisingly local businesses able influence state legislature see supra third state appears concerned unfair competitive behavior predatory pricing inequitable allocation petroleum products integrated firms examples specific misconduct asserted state answers app none concerns support discrimination proof record significant portion class firms burdened divestiture sections engaged misconduct furthermore predatory pricing unfair allocation already prohibited state federal law see emergency petroleum allocation act stat et seq ed energy policy conservation act stat ed maryland motor fuel inspection law md code art supp maryland antitrust act md com law code ann et seq maryland unfair sales act md com law code ann et seq less discriminatory legislation regulate leasing service stations owned integrated producers refiners prevent whatever evils arise leases cf maryland gasoline products marketing act md com law code ann supp sum state asserted vague interest preserving competition retail gasoline market shown interest vindicated legislation less discriminatory toward retailers therefore met burden justify discrimination inherent violate commerce clause ii arguments opinion maryland appeals decision appellees remove unconstitutional taint discrimination inherent offers essentially three responses discrimination retail gasoline market imposed divestiture provisions first says discrimination class producers refiners violate commerce clause state imposed similar discrimination retailers ante said distinguish present case hunt washington apple advertising fact however unconstitutional discrimination hunt interests north carolina enacted statute requiring apples marketed closed containers within state bear grade applicable grade standard commission contended provision discriminated interstate commerce prohibited display superior washington state apple grading marks strike provision discriminated marketing techniques growers provision imposed discrimination growers employed department agriculture grading system despite lack universal discrimination declared provision unconstitutional discriminated single segment marketers apples namely washington state growers employed superior grading system regard maryland divestiture provisions identical distinguishable north carolina statute hunt discrimination imposed segment retailers gasoline namely also refine produce petroleum accept argument discrimination must universal offend commerce clause naively foster protectionist discrimination interstate commerce future able insulate interests competition identifying potent segments business banning permitting less effective actors remain record shows permits maryland effect discrimination case state bans powerful firms retailing gasoline within boundaries insulates forced divestiture service stations constitutional attack permitting firms pantry pride fisca midway continue operate gasoline stations effective competition thereby emasculated doubt ingenious discrimination stated outset commerce clause forbids discrimination whether forthright ingenious best maxwell second contends subpart primary argument discrimination hunt raised cost business dealers various ways favored dealers local market comparable claim made ante seen discrimination hunt raised cost business one group marketers apples fallacy argument appears fact burden imposed upon class retailers subject discrimination far exceeds burdens hunt hunt statute merely increased costs deprived washington growers competitive advantages use grading system statute bans refiners producers retail market altogether burden lacks comparability effects hunt severe third asserts without citation fact burden state regulation falls interstate companies establish claim discrimination interstate commerce ante proposition correct extent incomplete apply facts present true merely demonstrating burden actors prove unconstitutional discrimination burden significant falls numerous effective group competitors similar burden fall class protected businessmen state justify resulting disparity showing legislative interests vindicated evenhanded regulation unconstitutional discrimination exists facts litigation demonstrate discrimination argue persuasively contrary contentions maryland appeals also found violation commerce clause convincing arguments opinion first appeals reasoned discriminate class refiners producers wholesale flow petroleum products state restricted md supposedly distinguished present facts dean milk madison involved unconstitutional discrimination interstate commerce begin however distinction drawn appeals basically irrelevant maryland statute effected discrimination regard wholesaling interstate transport petroleum discrimination exists regard retailing fact gasoline continue flow state permit state deny firms opportunity retail arrives furthermore dean milk distinguished ground asserted appeals invalidated general ordinances city madison outlawed local sale milk pasteurized within five miles city section legally effectively block flow milk madison greater extent restrictions sales gasoline companies block flow gasoline dean milk producers bring milk madison pasteurized madison sell madison without violating flow milk restricted merely producers chose deal madison pasteurizers similarly flow gasoline maryland may restricted producers refiners choose supply dealers replace operations second appeals said maryland legislation offend commerce clause legislature intended preserve competition discriminate interstate commerce argument fell trap confines state proffered justifications discrimination begin fact discrimination intended irrelevant discriminatory effects result statutory scheme furthermore fact legislature might laudable intent passed law justify divestiture provisions state must also show interests vindicated less discriminatory alternatives appeals erroneously failed require showing appellees third appeals resurrected outdated notion retailing merely local activity subject strictures commerce clause citing crescent oil mississippi crescent oil said operation cotton gins local manufacturing rather interstate commerce explained beginning part opinion however interstate character retail gasoline market years intervening constitutional economic development prevent application crescent oil facts litigation see nn accompanying text supra finally nothing argument appellees saves distinctions taint unconstitutionality first state argues discrimination interstate commerce occurred nexus interstate opposed local interests inheres production refining petroleum brief appellees although statement might correct abstract incorrect reality given structure maryland petroleum market due geological formation far known petroleum produced maryland due economics production refining well geology petroleum refined maryland matter actual fact inherent nexus exist status producers refiners distribution retailing gasoline maryland commerce clause forbid legislation discriminates factual circumstances forbids discrimination effect interstate commerce specific facts case production refining gasoline occurred maryland might unconstitutional different circumstances however producers refiners fair opportunity influence local legislators thereby prevent enactment economically disruptive legislation circumstances economic disruption felt directly maryland tend make local political processes responsive problems thereby created circumstances might never passed case however economic disruption sections visited upon economic interests upon businesses one basic assumptions commerce clause local political systems tend unresponsive problems felt local constituents instead local political units expected act constituents interests one basic purposes clause therefore prevent vindication unfairly burdening concerns thereby disrupting national economy second appellees argue appeals discriminate impermissibly maryland legislature passed intent preserve competition explained however mere assertion laudable purpose carry state burden justify discriminatory effects statute see parts supra third appellees rely upon appeals contention unconstitutional discrimination interstate commerce found flow interstate goods curtailed appellees assertion fares better appellees fail show effect flow interstate goods varies kind case dean milk see part supra iii decision brings mind words justice cardozo give entrance protectionism invite speedy end national solidarity constitution framed dominion political philosophy less parochial range framed upon theory peoples several must sink swim together long run prosperity salvation union division baldwin seelig presently challenged portions law enacted four years ago amended since md laws ch md laws ch statute codified md code art supp reads purpose law gasoline special fuels sold offered exposed sale shall subject inspection analysis hereinafter provided july producer refiner petroleum products shall open major brand secondary brand unbranded retail service station state maryland operate company personnel subsidiary company commissioned agent contract person firm corporation managing service station fee arrangement producer refiner station must operated retail service station dealer july producer refiner petroleum products shall operate major brand secondary brand unbranded retail service station state maryland company personnel subsidiary company commissioned agent contract person firm corporation managing service station fee arrangement producer refiner station must operated retail service station dealer every producer refiner wholesaler petroleum products supplying gasoline special fuels retail service station dealers shall extend voluntary allowances uniformly retail service station dealers supplied every producer refiner wholesaler petroleum products supplying gasoline special fuels retail service station dealers shall apply equipment rentals uniformly retail service station dealers supplied every producer refiner wholesaler petroleum products shall apportion uniformly gasoline special fuels retail service station dealers periods shortages equitable basis shall discriminate among dealers allotments art cl congress shall power regulate commerce foreign nations among several indian tribes inherent effect local regulation retail sales interstate commerce well illustrated dean milk city madison forbade sale pasteurized milk unless pasteurization occurred plant located within five miles center city general ordinances city madison even though local sale prohibited considered ordinance regulation interstate commerce cf best maxwell holding taxation local retailing within reach commerce clause frankfort distilleries holding retailing interstate commerce within scope sherman act see generally note gasoline marketing divestiture statutes preliminary constitutional economic assessment vand rev fisca oil giant food oil homes oil hudson oil midway petroleum national oil pantry pride savon gas stations sears roebuck operated gasoline stations maryland none organizations produced refined petroleum time statute restricted operations noted however statute reach firms deciding integrate backwards retailing refining producing suit filed hudson oil acquired refinery thus became another business subject ban app sections force ashland divest stations invested petroleum marketing stations valued another indication discrimination business amendment original legislative proposal exempt wholesalers gasoline divestiture requirements author proposal intended ban retailing wholesalers discriminate one class another asked exemption enacted replied general assembly make decision apparently wholesalers represented testimony hearings hear later date wanted exempt wholesalers local jobbers investment financial activity engagement wanted plea upon mercy committee speak information legislature maryland chose make discrimination hearsay general data men local businessmen definite tie refinery support record inference maryland legislature passed divestiture provisions response pleas local gasoline dealers protection competition price marketers major oil companies example executive director greater service station association represents almost local maryland dealers testified economic matters committee maryland senate like begin telling gentlemen desperate days service station dealers beset critical gasoline supply situation squeeze shrinking service tire battery accessory market dealer faced even serious problem sinister threat major oil companies complete takeover gasoline competition branded dealers squeeze convert stations company operation oil industry grown beyond borders country american character replaced multinational one legislators maryland let octopus loose unrestricted state maryland among small businessmen devour sincerely hope men see today american small business today asking legislators protect us economic giant take away livelihood children future greed greater profits please give us protection need save stations facts stipulated parties trial found retail petroleum marketing state maryland highly competitive industry result number location available facilities comparatively small capital costs entering business mobility purchaser time purchasing products relative interchangeability one competitor products another mind consumer visibility price information many choices consumer terms prices brands services offered joint app jurisdictional statements trial entered several findings integration oil companies need divestiture apart restraining free competition shown divestiture harmful competition industry primarily serve protect independent dealers rather public large proven detrimental effect upon retail market caused stations curbed federal state laws also finds preponderance evidence law preclude state ever entering competitive market maryland vertical integration prohibited neither effect public interest since competition essentially consumer benefit noteworthy also fact original draft law included wholesalers prohibition retail selling final draft law eliminated wholesalers sole reason according coleman wholesalers requested elimination act evidence whatsoever relative wholesalers included initially general public benefited exemption one hundred pounds pleadings motions briefs exhibits depositions concrete evidence act justified classes operators singled affected order promote general welfare citizens state rather apparent entire bill designed benefit one class merchants detriment another emphasis supplied statute distributor may unreasonably withhold certain consents distributor may unreasonably withhold consent assignment transfer sale renewal marketing agreement md trial circuit anne arundel county address question whether unconstitutionally discriminated interstate commerce held statute offended substantive due process violation maryland declaration rights art also notes discriminate interstate goods favor local producers refiners true observation irrelevant address discrimination inflicted upon retail marketing state cf part infra opinion ante suggests unconstitutional discrimination exist unless effect quantity goods entering state narrow view commerce clause first interstate commerce consists far mere production goods also consists transactions repeated buying selling goods services focusing exclusively quantity goods limits protection clause producers handlers goods enter discriminating state complex national economy commercial transactions continue goods enter state today permits state impose protectionist discrimination upon later transactions detriment participants second cites case held burden flow goods prerequisite establishing case unconstitutional discrimination interstate commerce neither hunt dean milk contains holding cases upheld claims discrimination neither say burden wholesale flow goods necessary part holding regarding hunt cites discusses whether appellants met requirement explained part infra case presents threat flow gasoline maryland identical threat flow milk dean milk growers marketed apples north carolina six state grading systems apart usda regulations fact disruption flow gasoline case greater disruption flow milk madison record supports proposition ban company operations may unsettle wholesale refining enterprises independent price marketers able profitably supply gasoline stations nonintegrated retailers maryland app given nation experience articles confederation assumption unreasonable one time authority regulate commerce rested rather congress pursuit state particular interests economy constituents nearly wrecked national economy almost catastrophic results sort situation harmful commercial wars reprisals home among hartman state taxation interstate commerce citing federalist nos hamilton madison