Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl

Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief supporting denial of certiorari in this case.

Issue: (1) Whether a state statute that imposes regulatory obligations that apply, as a matter of law, solely to out-of-state companies, but does not use “language explicitly identifying geographical distinctions” in its text, discriminates against interstate commerce; (2) whether the 10th Circuit erred in adopting a “comparative burdens” test for discrimination, under which the burden of regulatory requirements imposed solely on out-of-state retailers may be offset by different obligations on in-state retailers; and (3) whether the 10th Circuit erred in concluding that out-of-state retailers that do not collect Colorado sales tax are “not similarly situated” to their direct in-state competitors who collect Colorado sales tax.