Quik Payday relocated for summary judgment, providing three arguments beneath the inactive Commerce Clause: (1) the statute can be an impermissible extraterritorial legislation; (2) the statute impermissibly burdens interstate commerce beneath the balancing test of Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc., 397 U.S. 137, 90 S.Ct. 844, 25 L.Ed.2d 174 (1970); and (3) the statute subjects Web lending to state that is inconsistent. Regarding the exact same time, Defendants relocated for summary judgment on Quik Payday’s constitutional claims, including its contentions underneath the Due Process Clause that Kansas lacked the ability to modify it and that Kan. Stat. Ann. В§ 16a 1 201 is unconstitutionally obscure and overbroad. (Quik Payday would not look for summary judgment on these due process claims). The events stipulated towards the known facts to be looked at by the region court in determining their motions.

The region court denied Quik Payday’s movement for summary judgment and granted Defendants’ cross motion. It rejected all of Quik Payday’s three Commerce Clause challenges to your Kansas statute and its particular application to Quik Payday. It rejected the contention that Kansas had been wanting to control conduct completely outside its edges due to the fact Kansas statute is triggered as long as there is both solicitation in Kansas and that loan to at least one of their residents. Quik Payday, 509 F.Supp.2d at 981. The court cited our decision in Aldens, Inc. v. Ryan, 571 F.2d 1159 (10th Cir.1978), for the idea that “a state’s legislation regarding the price and terms on which its residents borrow funds from an out of state creditor is certainly not outweighed by the burdens on interstate business. pertaining to Pike balancing” Quik Payday, 509 F.Supp.2d at 979. And also as to uniformity that is national the court determined that Quik Payday hadn’t shown that “internet payday financing specifically represents the kind of commerce which should simply be at the mercy of nationally consistent requirements,” id. at 983; its regulated conduct ended up being aimed particularly at Kansas and would not always implicate other states or their laws. The court additionally joined judgment that is summary Defendants on Quik Payday’s due process claims. Id. at 984 85.

Quik Payday appeals the region court’s grant of summary judgment to your Defendants and also the denial of summary judgment to it self. 1 it generally does not challenge the region court’s due procedure rulings but just those concerning the Commerce Clause.

We review a district court’s decision to give summary judgment de novo, viewing all facts when you look at the light many favorable into the party opposing summary judgment. See Jacklovich v. Simmons, 392 F.3d 420, 425 (10th Cir.2004). We’re going to affirm a grant of summary judgment if you have no genuine problem of material reality while the party that is prevailing eligible to judgment underneath the legislation. See id. at 426; Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). Likewise, we conduct de novo report on legal issues, including challenges to your constitutionality of statutes. See Hoffmann Pugh v. Keenan, 338 F.3d 1136, 1138 (10th Cir.2003).

The Dormant Commerce Clause

The Supreme Court “long has recognized that the affirmative grant of authority to Congress to regulate interstate commerce also encompasses an implicit or ‘dormant’ limitation regarding the authority regarding the States to enact legislation impacting interstate business.” Healy v. Beer Inst., 491 U.S. 324, 326 n. 1, 109 S.Ct. 2491, 105 L.Ed.2d 275 (1989); see Dennis v. Higgins, 498 U.S. payday loans Issaquah no bank account 439, 447, 111 S.Ct. 865, 112 L.Ed.2d 969 (1991) (“The Commerce Clause does a lot more than confer energy regarding the government; additionally it is a restriction that is substantive permissible state legislation of interstate business.” (interior quote marks omitted)). State statutes may break the inactive limitation in 3 ways: