Anew statute passed by the state of vermont prohibits the sale of any maple syrup not produced in vermont anywhere in vermont. the legislators maintain that the statute is for the health and welfare of vermont residents because the state of vermont regulates producers to ensure quality and sanitation standards. the new statute is

unconstitutional because of its excessive approach.

Explanation:

As you may already know, all US states are subject to federal laws, which must be obeyed throughout the United States. However, all states in the country have the autonomy to formulate their own legislation that will be valid for the entire territory of the state, as long as it does not go against any federal law. There is a federal regulation that states that it is not allowed to hinder or prevent interstate commerce. From this we can state that the statute created and approved by the state of Vermont, which prohibits the sale of any maple syrup not produced in Vermont, is unconstitutional.

This statute is unconstitutional because, in addition to having an excessive approach, it goes against a federal norm.

in this scenario it would be the consumer demand as most influential in making the decision. the band members need to figure out where and from whom they will make the most money, in other words who out of the two consumer groups - football fans or car drivers - will spend their money, who is more likely to contribute to their cause and buy what they are offering.

answer; earthquake;