Final answer:
The dormant Commerce Clause does not absolutely prohibit states from making laws that affect interstate commerce but restricts them from enacting legislation that discriminates against or excessively burdens it, preserving federal authority under the Commerce Clause.
Step-by-step explanation:
The dormant Commerce Clause is not a total prohibition on the right of states to make laws that affect interstate commerce. Rather, it is a legal doctrine that implies that states cannot enact legislation that discriminates against or excessively burdens interstate commerce. This ensures that the power granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause remains predominant in matters of interstate trade and regulation, preventing states from disrupting the flow of interstate commerce.
The principles of the dormant Commerce Clause have been highlighted in landmark decisions such as Gibbons v. Ogden which emphasized the authority of the federal government in regulating interstate commerce. However, in cases like United States v. Lopez, the Supreme Court enforced limits on the breadth of regulatory laws that Congress could pass under the Commerce Clause, thereby reinforcing states' rights in local matters that may not substantially affect interstate commerce.
Therefore, the states do retain some rights to legislate on matters of interstate commerce, as long as those laws do not conflict with federal regulations and do not hinder the free flow of trade between states.