Dean Milk Co. v. Madison
340 U.S. 349 (1951)
Author: Joe

Facts: The county of Madison passed an ordinance barring the sale of pasteurized milk unless it had been processed and bottled at an approved pasteurization plant within 5 miles of the central square of Madison.  Madison officials inspected these plants every 30 days and it was argued that this ordinance was there to insure the healthy quality of the milk.

Issue:  Was this law repugnant to the dormant commerce clause?

Holding: Yes

Rationale:  According to the court, the Madison plainly discriminates against interstate commerce.  Madison has a reasonable goal to protect the health of its residents, but the means it is using are wrong.  Court also uses the balancing test and comes to the conclusion that since there are alternative and less intrusive methods available that can be used to achieve the same goals, the harm of the ordinance is outweighed by its benefits.

NOTE:  This case shows that a law can be held repugnant to dormant commerce clause even if it discriminates against not only out-of-state businesses but also in-state businesses.