Suppose that New Hampshire enacts a law requiring the use of contoured rear-fender mudguards on trucks and trailers operating within its state lines. The statute further makes it illegal for trucks and trailers to use straight mudguards. In thirty-five other states straight mudguards are legal. Moreover, in Maine, straight mudguards are explicitly required by law. There is some evidence that contoured mudguards might be a little safer than straight mudguards. Discuss whether this hypothetical New Hampshire statute would violate the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. Does this statute violate the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution? A state law which applies only within its borders may be in violation of the Commerce Clause, and therefore unconstitutional as a matter of federal law, if it places an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce. [Through was has come to be known as the "dormant commerce clause, " states do not have the right to regulate interstate commerce.] A court would analyze whether the NH statute which presumably would require trucks to change their mudguards when entering and leaving New Hampshire on their way to and from Maine or be subject to fines, or in the most absurd case to offload to a NH company for the trip through NH and transfer to another truck in Maine or Massachusetts. A court would balance New Hampshire's interest in marginally improving safety compared to what other states are doing and the overall affect the statute would have on interstate commerce. It appears that a court would find that this hypothetical statute violates the US Constitution.