---

539 U.S. ____ (2003)

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

---

Nos. 01—950 and 01—1018

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

[June 9, 2003]

Justice Thomas, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I join Parts I and III of the Court’s opinion and respectfully dissent from Part II, which holds that §144 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, 7 U.S.C. § 7254 “does not clearly express an intent to insulate California’s pricing and pooling laws from a Commerce Clause challenge.” Ante, at 6—7. Although I agree that the Court of Appeals erred in its statutory analysis, I nevertheless would affirm its judgment on this claim because “[t]he negative Commerce Clause has no basis in the text of the Constitution, makes little sense, and has proved virtually unworkable in application,” Camps Newfound/Owatonna, Inc. v. Town of Harrison, 520 U.S. 564, 610 (1997) (Thomas, J., dissenting), and, consequently, cannot serve as a basis for striking down a state statute.