Rules for out-of-state goods
PacifiCorp v. Sixkiller
In brief
- Where it stands
- Petition Pending
Awaiting an order on the petition
- What it’s about
- PacifiCorp, an Oregon utility, argues that Washington’s cap-and-trade rules place a different burden on the same electricity depending on whether it is sold in or out of state, and that the Ninth Circuit read Tracy too broadly.
- What's at stake
- PacifiCorp’s challenge to Washington’s rules remains unresolved at the Supreme Court.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
Its petition was distributed for a Supreme Court conference, a step that does not mean the Court agreed to hear the case.
PacifiCorp says the Ninth Circuit read the Supreme Court’s earlier Tracy decision too broadly.
Question presented
Whether Tracy exempts a State from dormant Commerce Clause scrutiny when state law imposes different burdens on the same product based on whether the product is sold in state or out of state?
What happens next
The petition was distributed for the Court’s Nov. 6, 2026 conference. That does not mean the Court has agreed to hear the case or guarantee an order date; no oral argument or decision date is set.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Case data updated: documents, description, proceeding_type
Show 4 moreShow fewer
Case data updated: documents, description, proceeding_type
Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type
Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.