Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-468_5if6.pdf
Page Number: 39

Cite as:  598 U. S. ____ (2023) 

1 

BARRETT, J., concurring
BARRETT, J., concurring in part 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 21–468 
_________________ 

NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS COUNCIL, ET AL., 
PETITIONERS v. KAREN ROSS, IN HER OFFICIAL 
CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE CALI-
FORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD & 
AGRICULTURE, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

[May 11, 2023] 

JUSTICE BARRETT, concurring in part. 
A state law that burdens interstate commerce in clear ex-
cess  of  its  putative  local  benefits  flunks  Pike  balancing. 
Pike  v.  Bruce  Church,  Inc.,  397  U. S.  137,  142  (1970).    In 
most  cases,  Pike’s  “general  rule”  reflects  a  commonsense 
principle: Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.  Ibid.  Under 
our  dormant  Commerce  Clause  jurisprudence,  one  State
may  not  discriminate  against  another’s  producers  or  con-
sumers.  A law whose burdens fall incommensurately and 
inexplicably  on  out-of-state  interests  may  be  doing  just
that. 

But  to  weigh  benefits  and  burdens,  it  is  axiomatic  that
both must be judicially cognizable and comparable.  See De-
partment of Revenue of Ky. v. Davis, 553 U. S. 328, 354–355 
(2008).  I  agree  with  JUSTICE  GORSUCH  that  the  benefits 
and burdens of Proposition 12 are incommensurable.  Cali-
fornia’s  interest  in  eliminating  allegedly  inhumane  prod-
ucts from its markets cannot be weighed on a scale opposite 
dollars and cents—at least not without second-guessing the
moral judgments of California voters or making the kind of
policy decisions reserved for politicians.  Ante, at 18–21; Da-
vis, 553 U. S., at 360 (Scalia, J., concurring in part).  None