Is it reasonable for states to boycott one another to protest policy?

This Arizona thing brings up a question in my mind about states being pressured to boycott one another for legal choices they make. Should Iowa boycott California because unlike Iowa, California has a constitutional ban on gay marriage? I can disagree with laws in a different state, but more important than that, I do believe in states rights. If the people of a state vote for something unique to that state, how much pressure is reasonable from other states in your opinion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForrestBlack

This Arizona thing brings up a question in my mind about states being pressured to boycott one another for legal choices they make. Should Iowa boycott California because unlike Iowa, California has a constitutional ban on gay marriage? I can disagree with laws in a different state, but more important than that, I do believe in states rights. If the people of a state vote for something unique to that state, how much pressure is reasonable from other states in your opinion?

---

One of the reasons for a number of state DOMA laws is the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution (recognition of one state's law by another being the "norm" here) This would apply more to marriage as clearly couples may marry in Iowa and move to California. DOMA negates their need to recognize the law. With immigration, that is a good question. I don't see California law enforcement pulling folks over on the suspicion that they were illegal immigrants. I doubt they currently could do so under California law.

Economic pressure would be difficult given the current reading of the Interstate Commerce Clause.

I think it would have to be a states rights issue. Obviously, anyone can protest it. It will be challenged in federal court (and probably be struck down).

I guess it would depend on the nature of the protest. I think a state would have a hard time passing laws or economically boycotting Arizona given the current situation.

So: My opinion would be that it is simply a matter of personal conscience.

OEC

Nothing involving states is ever reasonable, but when they have a go at one another it does get pretty funny.

Boycotts are not a violation of states rights, they are a peaceful way to encourage change. No state in the US is not a brutal dictatorship that can let its people starve if another quits spending money there, it is just the other state saying, we do not want to finance your current choices. Even then, it is largely the state government not purchasing as much from the boycotted state, they are not preventing travel to the state, or expelling imports from the state.

Every state impacts other states and their laws impact those around them. A boycott is a peaceful way to try to change the laws. And yes, I will get angry when someone boycotts my state for what I believe is a stupid reason, but that doesn't really make it unreasonable, just something I don't like.

isn't everybody free to boycott whatever they want?......well, except taxes

I've always advocated the idea that each state should have different politics and laws,
so people can pick someplace to live that matches their own values.

So if you want sex, drugs, and rock and roll, move to CA, and let us be very
liberal, etc.

If you dislike that stuff, and want church, creationism in schools, etc, then move to Utah...

But in order for that to work, the states need to accept each other's right to be different.

If I was an illegal immigrant, I'd avoid AZ, because they are obviously very serious about
combating illegal immigration. But if CA is cool with it, then go to CA... Seems like a decent
plan to me. But the boycott thing will end up with the midwest denying food to CA,
and CA and NY not giving their tax dollars to the midwest, and so on. So it's not a
good example to set.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ty-supply.html

Looks like some municipal governments are beginning or threatening to boycott. Need to see more sources on what is going on here.

haha, reading that made me think of master blaster and his 'embargo' in that mad max movie