In Southern Pacific Co v. Arizona, concerning whether Arizona ...

[Lobcity]

In Southern Pacific Co v. Arizona, concerning whether Arizona could, for safety considerations, require trains traveling through the state be a shorter length than trains traveling through other states. The Supreme Court held the Arizona law was:
 a. valid because it concerned a legitimate state interest to improve transportation safety b. valid because Congress had not passed legislation dealing with the length of trains
  c. valid because it did not conflict with federal standards d. invalid because it impeded interstate commerce
  e. none of the other choices

Question 2

States may pass regulations that:
 a. are stricter than federal regulations b. less strict than federal regulations
  c. in contradiction to federal regulations
  d. all of the other specific choices are correct
  e. none of the other specific choices are correct

[aloop]

Answer to Question 1

d

Answer to Question 2

a

[Lobcity]

YES! Correct, THANKS for helping me on my review

[ghepp]

Thanks for the timely response, appreciate it