AEM vs North Dakota – Support Defendants’ Motion For Partial Summary Judgment

Case 1:17-cv-00151-DLH-CSM 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA 

AEM vs North Dakota

Document 96 Filed 09/07/18 Page 1 of 95

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION

FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

For the reasons stated above, North Dakota is entitled to partial summary judgment. The State respectfully requests this Court to conclude, as a matter of law, that SB 2289 does not violate the Commerce Clause, that § 2(a) of the Robinson-Patman Act does not conflict-preempt SB 2289, and that SB 2289 does not constitute a taking under the Takings Clause. Therefore, this Court should grant the Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.