Suppose a state wanted to ban traveling animal circuses like RIngling Brothers, could they do so or would that violate the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Consitution?
What if they didn’t ban them outright but put some sort of requirements on the animal care while in state (i.e. elephants must be not be shackled, but must be allowed free range in a adequately contained area not smaller than 500 sq. feet) that made it pretty much prohibitive to come to that state?
So long as the circus’s based in that state follow the same restrictions they should be OK.
I don’t see how this would violate the Commerce Clause. States have all sorts of restrictions on the sorts of businesses that can operate in them, from licensing to outright bans. The state could not prevent the circus from traveling through the state because SCOTUS has found that there is a constitutional right to travel but the state could certainly prohibit the circus from performing within its borders.
Here’s an article an the “dormant” or “negative” commerce clause
Assuming that the ban wasn’t engineered to protect local circuses from having to compete with Ringling Brothers, I would say that it would likely withstand a challenge.