Question

A bitter rivalry exists between residents of Minnesota and Wisconsin over their favorite National Football League teamsthe Vikings and the Packers. Because Minneapolis is so close to the Wisconsin border, many Packers fans try to flood the Metrodome (a publicly owned sports stadium rented out to the Vikings) each season for the game between the rival teams. To prevent the stadium from being filled with a majority of Packers fans for this game, the Vikings instituted a new ticket policy. All fans who wish to purchase tickets for the Packers/Vikings game must also purchase tickets for at least two Vikings preseason games. The tickets are sold as a "package deal," according to the Vikings, and the sole purpose of the policy is to guarantee that the stadium is filled for preseason games that are often not high-demand games. Many Packers fans see the policy as, at best, an impediment to seeing their favorite team play, and, at worst, a punishment.
Respondent Brett Driver argues that the additional purchase requirement is, in essence, a tax allowed by the state, given that the stadium is state owned. The tax, as he sees it, is not meant to raise revenue but rather to regulate activity. Further, he argues that the tax violates the Interstate Commerce Clause because the NFL is an interstate industry and therefore only Congress can regulate it by setting up such taxes. Driver has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the "ticket tax" and again allow fans to purchase tickets for all games without having to purchase tickets for games they do not want to see.
Suppose you were a justice in this case. Would you rule in favor of Driver (in part or in full) or the Vikings (in part or in full)? Why?Be sure to (1) justify your response with reference to relevant Supreme Court precedent and (2) consider, incorporate, or, at least, acknowledge arguments that may not support your response.

Answer


*A. Varies