In this scenario, the state of Confusion passed a law that requires all trucks and towing trailers that use Confusion highways to use a B-type truck hitch. The hitch is made by one company in Confusion, and any trucker who wants to drive through the state of Confusion has to stop and have the B-type hitch installed or they would have to drive around Confusion. The federal government has not made any attempt to regulate the truck hitches used on the nation’s highways. Tanya Trucker, who trucking company contends that the additional expense this statute imposes on her business is unnecessary and frivolous. She intends to file suit against Confusion to overturn the statute. * Before Tanya files her law suit she needs some questions answered, such as which court will have jurisdiction over this case, is the statue constitutional, what provisions of the U.S. Constitution will be applied by the courts to determine the statue’s validity, and finally the steps to filing a civil suit. I believe Tanya should file suit in Federal court to challenge the constitutionality of this law. She should file suit in the federal court in the state of Confusion since they would have the most knowledge of the reasoning and understand the subject matter the most. I do not believe this statute is constitutional. The Commerce Clause protects intra-state trade and this law would affect the free flow of trade among the states. * Since Tanya’s company is from the State of Denial where no such law exists it creates issues and added expense if she wishes to conduct business in the State of Confusion. Tanya would have added time, energy and costs in order to travel through this state. Assuming she has a large operation, the cost of installing these hitches on all of her trucks is unfair to her simply because of a state law. This law adversely affects free flow of trade among the